Skip to main content

View Diary: Most famous wolf killed by hunter when pack ranged just outside Yellowstone (283 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Also, a wolf attacking you or someone else (4+ / 0-)

    Which I understand is extremely rare and something out of Grimm, but also a legitimate reason, in addition to these. Otherwise, nuh uh.

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 06:47:22 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Also if there are enough wolves that shooting one (0+ / 0-)

      won't negatively affect the species, and you want to.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 08:15:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  When the population gets anywhere near that level (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        atana, Christin, kyril

        We can talk in another fifteen years time

        Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

        by Mindful Nature on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 08:22:02 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  passed it ten years ago according to US Fish and (0+ / 0-)

          Wildlife Service.

          How big is your personal carbon footprint?

          by ban nock on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 08:37:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hardly (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            atana, BlueDragon, Agathena, kyril, wordwraith

            the species is still listed throughout the west  The wyoming popluation was delisted based on politics, not science.  Again, we have more lies put out by the pro-death lobby.  However, your claim is largely disproved by your own claim that the population growth rate is 30% unchekced, which is a fairly strong indication that the species is not at carrying capacity, particular since elk populations have not crashed as would happen in an overshoot.

            So, in a word, get your facts straight.

            Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

            by Mindful Nature on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 09:02:32 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  No, not even if you want to (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        schnecke21, PhilJD, kyril

        Only if you HAVE to. People don't eat wolves, unlike deer, ducks, possum and even squirrels. And we don't lack for better kinds of fur.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 08:39:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wildlife managers don't determine game laws (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kenevan McConnon

          based on eating of meat or use of fur, though it's well known that the guard hairs of canine's winter coats will keep frost from accumulating on the parka hood around your face and are used for just that reason. Managers make game quotas based on population objectives or goals. In a large part of Wyoming they don't want any wolves, so they have shoot on site regulations. In areas surrounding Yellowstone in accommodating the interests of animal rights sorts of people they set different population objectives so to maintain a minimum number of wolves.

          In Montana and Idaho they have different population objectives.

          They can either pay Wildlife Services to cull from aircraft of do as they usually do and ask hunters to help.

          There is also the knowledge that some people will like hunting wolves, indeed many do, and there will be an advocacy group of hunters who want to maintain populations so they'll have animals to hunt.

          How big is your personal carbon footprint?

          by ban nock on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 09:00:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Which has what to do with what's best for wolves (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            atana, Christin, White Buffalo, wordwraith

            who were here before these ranchers and their bovines and their stupid NRA? The law is whatever we say it is, and should reflect the interests of nature over the interests of some idiots who enjoy shooting wild things that don't bother anyone. If the price of beef goes up by a nickel, I'm ok with that. We eat too much of it as it is, and herds could probably stand to benefit from their own natural culling.

            "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

            by kovie on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 09:09:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  the question itself its wrong (0+ / 0-)

              The question is and always should be what is best for mankind.

              I have no idea what the correct balance is here but arguing that our main consideration should be what is best for the wolves and that the wolves have ownership of the land because "they were here first"  is simply crazy talk that all but the most unreasonably extreme leftists will consider the ramblings of nutjobs.

      •  How very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very (0+ / 0-)

        very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very American of you.

        "And you want to."

        the ultimate expression of the American ethic.

        To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

        by UntimelyRippd on Sun Dec 09, 2012 at 07:54:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site