Don: Hey, Gale. What did you do last summer again?
Gale Norton: I told you! I spent it with my uncle in Idaho hunting wolves!
Don: Did you shoot any?
Gale Norton: Yes, like 50 of 'em! They kept trying to attack my cousins, what the heck would you do in a situation like that?
Don: What kind of gun did you use?
Gale Norton: A freakin' 12-gauge, what do you think?
:D
Sniper Joe wrote:
Same thing, don't you see wolves help keep animal populations under control Isn't that what they're trying to do here by killing the wolves? Keep populations under control? With Wolves and hunters killing the Elk, the Elk really are screwed. Now in a perfect world the hunters would just stop hunting Elk, or at least slow down, but we all know they're not going to do that. I don't like the idea, but I'd rather see the wolf population low than the Elk wiped out. We can only hope that they survive long enough for staying home and playing video game to become popular enough to wipe out hunting. and sure they are a menace when there populations grow, but what animals aren't? Which is exactly why we have to kill those damn Elk! They're population is out of control and they're a menace! They're taking out jobs too! =P (Just to be safe, I better state that I'm joking) | |
Technically, too many predators will subsequently result in a loss of prey for said predators, thus resolving itself as the predators eventually starve to death, for that reason nature generally takes care of itself. The only problem comes into play when there are too many humans. We don't starve to death very easily (at least in this part of the world), and so our problems with other species and our war for resources is only natural. But, as Plato said, man's role in existance is to reason, and if you're a Christian or Jewish you may understand the whole thing about being good stewards of the earth. Hunting is good or evil depending on the scenario...
But...I've always wanted a wolf cub to raise on my own. I've always had a knack for taking in stray and abused animals that would otherwise rip one's face off. And as a kid I could hear a wolf's baying across the street during the night as it was kept by a neighboring farmer. Man...I know it would be hard to do, but if I don't end up with a Husky soon...I may be driving to Idaho...Lol. | |
"We can only hope that they survive long enough for staying home and playing video game to become popular enough to wipe out hunting."
Rofl, so true. That's the future of tomorrow. | |
Do you remember the time Chuck Norris gave you a pat on the back and broke it?
Or the time Chuck Norris made those 3 laddies orgasm by doing a roundhouse kick into a polar bear? | |
I'm going to take action against taking action.
DON'T DO ANYTHING! BE LAZY! | |
You and your wolves. I remember signing one of your online petitions back when I used my Rurouni Dragon key regularly, and that was at least a half-year ago.
Hiead | |
Ben G i just saw your post about mine and if you read mine right you would see that english is not my first language i hope you understand.
SAVE THE WOLVES!! | |
Wolves are little bastards that can not only hurt humans, but other wild life and house pets. If they are becoming a problem, then by all means, kill the wolves.
A few years back in Michigan and Wisconsin the deer were so out of control they hired sharp shooters and let them go wild, even IN town. People didn't even need permits for Doe and Fawn , everything was free game. What is the reason why they are killing these wolves? Why are they handing it over to the peopel of Idiao? There is probly more of a reason then just hateing wolves. Right now in Michigan we are actully trying to kill off certian kinds of fish and freah water muscels because they were brought over from other places, they are forgein animals and they are runing Lake Michigan and the other great lakes. So, exactly why would they kill off Wolves? Edit: I didn't read the article, so I wouldn't know. For hunting? Oh well. kill em. Online Petitions don't do jack crap anyways, its a waste of time. They have no valid proof and can easily faked. People are going to vote, its going to pass, one less stupid animal on the planet. I don't care. By the time the world is wreck I'll be dead anyways. Dodo bird? They were one of the dumbest birds alive, thats why they died. | |
You guys must not understand how the food chain works, if they dont kill the 50 wolfs, they will breed, eat all the elk, and guess what they move onto next, cattle, chickens, and possibly humans, etc... do you understand that??? unless you want to eat grass and leaves the rest of your life, i suggest everyone who says its ignorant to kill them, not say anything at all.
Lets just all eat plants and not hunt anything, while the animals suffer because what 6 billion humans are taking there food (PLANTS) so they starve to death so why not just continue humanely killing animals and eat meat so they dont have to suffer either way if we eat plants or meat animals will eventualy die, every living thing has to die sometime or another, what if the wolf was going to die in another week, why not just kill it now so they dont have to suffer in pain of some disease or starvation, would you want a bullet to your head and die in 1 second or squirm and flop on the ground for hours and possibly days because you couldnt find food. Think about that, please dont reply a bunch of flames i never insulted a particular name, im just making a point. | |
Shattered wings wrote:
You guys must not understand how the food chain works, if they dont kill the 50 wolfs, they will breed, eat all the elk, and guess what they move onto next, cattle, chickens, and possibly humans, etc... do you understand that??? And if you do kill them the eld become overpopulated and you have a different problem. Ecological management is something that humans have tried many times and done horribly at. The only thing you can do is try and steer ecology around a little bit. Trying to solve problems drastically like this only creates bigger problems. Lets just all eat plants and not hunt anything, while the animals suffer because what 6 billion humans are taking there food (PLANTS) so they starve to death Fifty wolves are not going to force the entire planet's population to become vegetarians. Even if it did, the vegetation most people eat is grown on farms and does not subtract from the forest's food supply. so why not just continue humanely killing animals and eat meat so they dont have to suffer either way if we eat plants or meat animals will eventualy die, every living thing has to die sometime or another You are going to die sometime or another, so why don't we just shoot you now? This is sarcasm, of course, as I would rather you stay alive and healthy. what if the wolf was going to die in another week, why not just kill it now so they dont have to suffer in pain of some disease or starvation, would you want a bullet to your head and die in 1 second or squirm and flop on the ground for hours and possibly days because you couldnt find food. The fifty wolves in question are all diseased, starving, squirming and flopping on the ground? I was unaware of that part, it must have been mentioned in some other reply I did not read, as I tend to not read all the replies when the threads get lengthy like this. | |
Human intervention never fixed an ecology. An ecosystem pretty much always equalises and rights itself- such is the natural process of numbers, statistics and so on. Conscious intervention always* screws it up.
*not always. But quite a bit. >_> | |
Elation wrote:
Conscious intervention always* screws it up. Close enough to always. That is, macro-intervention. Many small interventions, on the other hand, meant to steer an ecology a small amount rather than just change it can be beneficial, assuming you aren't expecting any major differences in the end. If we really wanted to do the ecosystem good, we'd have to drastically change our own habits before we touched that of any of the animals. Don't get me wrong, I'm not an anti-society hippie shouting about how the planet is ruined because of our polution; but all of our polutants, construction, destruction and land reformation do hinder things. But now I'm starting to go off topic a bit, so I'll stop there despite the urge to ramble on. | |
Well, couldn't they just trap them and release them in wildlife reserves or other places with lower wolf populations?
Of course, that would be a lot more expensive than simply killing them, but I think it's worth the pretty penny. ~Kujila | |
elks dont do nothing but eat grass
i know 50 wolfs wont force everyone to become vegatarions, im just saying that if we did become it, it would be a big problem well if you are majorly sick and on the verge of dieing, would you rather go imedetiently or suffer no they aint all diseased, some of them are, im saying they aint going to kill 50 wolf PUPPIES they are going to kill adults who have a couple months left on there live, give or take a few, and yes they will eventualy die of a disease or age, and they will suffer, because you know what, there is no wolf hosptial in the middle of the woods so when they get cancer, guess what, no therapy, they suffer horribly | |
Here in New York, deer are hunted to reduce their numbers. And indeed, we actually don't hunt enough of the suckers because they're a menace. Their predators around here are coyotes and coydogs, the former of which probably need serious trimming and the latter of which needs frickin' extinction. But here, both deer and coyotes are a pest. I'm not sure I see Idaho's reasoning unless they've seen some major problems with wolves.
Lummox JR