Originally posted by flyUnitySo are you for eradicating the mountain lions as well? I know that people were complaining that the elk and deer herds in Wyoming were too large just five years ago. If the herds are dwindling then Wyoming should issue fewer tags. The heards are dwindling because more people are moving to Wyoming. Why they are moving to Wyoming east of the Tetons you got me, but that is irrelevant. A mountain lion killed a horse less than a mile from my house! We should kill all the mountain lions? Coyotes kill cats and dogs around here all the time. Should we wipe out the coyotes (good luck on that one)?
I live In Wyoming, and I know first hand affect of wolves, I remember the days when they was NOT a problem. Our elk herd and deer population is way down from what it used to be, Believe me. Why do you think we killed them in the first place? I don't know one person in the State of Wyoming that is in favor of letting the wolves protected, There is way to ma ...[text shortened]... reason Im in favor of giving States way more power, and reducing Federal goverment big time
Originally posted by NicolaiSYes, but people isnt, There is getting less and less habitat, and the deer and elk population cant survive both wolf and humans, It wont balance itself out because the wolf can survive eating unnatural food, such as calves, sheep etc. so therefore the wolf population grows in the presence of humans, whereas the deer and elk herds reduce as a result of humans.
Uhhh ... aren't wolves part of the natural wildlife? Without human intervention the population of both wolves and deer would be balanced.
1 edit
Originally posted by CliffLandinwill if can find fault in mountain lions and want to shoot them also then by all means....feel free to fire away.i think you would get rewards in heaven if even just one person benefits a little...was the horse a neigh....bouring friend of yours?
So are you for eradicating the mountain lions as well? I know that people were complaining that the elk and deer herds in Wyoming were too large just five years ago. If the herds are dwindling then Wyoming should issue fewer tags. The heards are dwindling because more people are moving to Wyoming. Why they are moving to Wyoming east of the Tetons you got ...[text shortened]... cats and dogs around here all the time. Should we wipe out the coyotes (good luck on that one)?
1 edit
Originally posted by CliffLandinI never heard anyone complain that the herds were to big, I remember as a kid seing hundreds of elk coming down from the mountians in the winter, now days I never see an elk by my place, and the hundreds of deer that used to come through our feild, its more like 20 now.
So are you for eradicating the mountain lions as well? I know that people were complaining that the elk and deer herds in Wyoming were too large just five years ago. If the herds are dwindling then Wyoming should issue fewer tags. The heards are dwindling because more people are moving to Wyoming. Why they are moving to Wyoming east of the Tetons you got ...[text shortened]... cats and dogs around here all the time. Should we wipe out the coyotes (good luck on that one)?
We can shoot mountian loins and coyotes, and they are balanced very well, A rancher had a mountian loin keep chasing his horse through a cattle gaurd, so he went out and shot it. My dad killed 3 of them, and there not nere as a problem to us, also they are scared of humans as a result from being hunted. I live east of the tetons. Whats do you not like that is east of the Tetons?
Originally posted by flyUnityYou can shoot them if you can prove that they are a threat to your livestock. You can't just go out and shoot them just to kill them. You have to have a tag to shoot mountain lions and you can only shoot coyotes if they are threatening livestock.
I never heard anyone complain that the herds were to big, I remember as a kid seing hundreds of elk coming down from the mountians in the winter, now days I never see an elk by my place, and the hundreds of deer that used to come through our feild, its more like 20 now.
We can shoot mountian loins and coyotes, and they are balanced very well, A rancher h ...[text shortened]... from being hunted. I live east of the tetons. Whats do you not like that is east of the Tetons?
You certainly cannot be blaming the wolves for the dwindling of the elk herds, they were only reintroduced in Wyoming five years ago. When I was a child the loggerhead turtles used to lay their eggs on Miami Beach, should we blow up all the condos and hotels so that the turtles can once again lay their eggs on the beach?
Originally posted by flyUnityI was just kidding about east of the Tetons. I love the Wind Rivers. Wyoming is an incredibly beautiful state. The east side is just so flat and windy.
I never heard anyone complain that the herds were to big, I remember as a kid seing hundreds of elk coming down from the mountians in the winter, now days I never see an elk by my place, and the hundreds of deer that used to come through our feild, its more like 20 now.
We can shoot mountian loins and coyotes, and they are balanced very well, A rancher h ...[text shortened]... from being hunted. I live east of the tetons. Whats do you not like that is east of the Tetons?
Originally posted by flyUnityExactly ... so the problem is not wolves, but man. Shooting the wolves will not solve the problem of the deer and elk when man will continu to destroy its habitat. The result will be no deer, no elk and no wolves.
Yes, but people isnt, There is getting less and less habitat, and the deer and elk population cant survive both wolf and humans, It wont balance itself out because the wolf can survive eating unnatural food, such as calves, sheep etc. so therefore the wolf population grows in the presence of humans, whereas the deer and elk herds reduce as a result of humans.
In short, in my opinion, a better solution would be to save large parts of the habitat by not allowing man to destroy it. This will mean that large parts of our earth should not be urbanized or cultivated.
Originally posted by NicolaiSI'd buy that for a dollar!
Exactly ... so the problem is not wolves, but man. Shooting the wolves will not solve the problem of the deer and elk when man will continu to destroy its habitat. The result will be no deer, no elk and no wolves.
In short, in my opinion, a better solution would be to save large parts of the habitat by not allowing man to destroy it. This will mean that large parts of our earth should not be urbanized or cultivated.
Actually they have those places. They are called National Parks, but our government with it's incredibly shorts-sighted policies has open them up to drilling.
Originally posted by NicolaiS"Natural" wildlife? Is there unnatural wildlife?
Uhhh ... aren't wolves part of the natural wildlife? Without human intervention the population of both wolves and deer would be balanced.
If wolves and deer existed without man, they'd reach some sort of equilibrium in relative numbers. If wolves and deer and humans exist together, the same thing will happen. In either case there may be an extinction of some species or other. This happens a lot in nature. Is this "balance"?
Of course, wolves and deer are known to be able to coexist in equilibrium, while the same cannot be said of humans and wolves. I guess that's what you mean?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThere is "natural" wildlife and unnatural wildlife in the context of what should be in one habitat and what has been introduced by meddling humans. There are scores of example of humans introducing certain species to an area and the native species being wiped out.
"Natural" wildlife? Is there unnatural wildlife?
If wolves and deer existed without man, they'd reach some sort of equilibrium in relative numbers. If wolves and deer and humans exist together, the same thing will happen. In either case there may be an extinction of some species or other. This happens a lot in nature. Is this "balance"?
Of c ...[text shortened]... ibrium, while the same cannot be said of humans and wolves. I guess that's what you mean?
Of course all wildlife is natural. It is just a question of whether they are "natural" to the areas that they are being released into.
Originally posted by CliffLandinIn that case, aren't humans whose ancestors came west from Britain, and Spain, and everywhere, 'unnatural.' Aren't there scores of examples of native species being wiped out as a result of human interaction? I refer you to the dodo.
There is "natural" wildlife and unnatural wildlife in the context of what should be in one habitat and what has been introduced by meddling humans. There are scores of example of humans introducing certain species to an area and the native species being wiped out.
Of course all wildlife is natural. It is just a question of whether they are "natural" to the areas that they are being released into.