Wolves are important....

[DaSkip]

This is pretty interesting.

[griffin]

Very interesting ! Thanks Skip !

[Backroad Mike]

Any link to some scientific study to backup the claim?

Wolves have decimated elk herd numbers in the region. I had some discussions with Jay while we visited and he's forwarded some rather blatant government abuse of the system to support the reintroduction of wolves. Especially since those reintroduced were NOT native to the area, but the larger Canadian breed that is twice the size of the native species.

Anybody want to run into a pack of 200 lb wolves?

I'd rather they allow permit hunting of the elk in the park to reduce the numbers than the slaughter going on with the wolf packs.

JMHO.

[Fe Butte]

OMG! Shoot the poor little elk with assault guns.

Oh the horror!

Just kidding.

We have people hit deer on the highway, sometimes the deer is damaged and still alive. When the trooper shows up to put it down, the people wonder why don't we take it to the Vet.

And, really?, who's gonna pay that bill, just so it can dart across the highway again and get hit by a car.

[vafatboy]

Originally Posted by Backroad Mike

Any link to some scientific study to backup the claim?

Wolves have decimated elk herd numbers in the region. I had some discussions with Jay while we visited and he's forwarded some rather blatant government abuse of the system to support the reintroduction of wolves. Especially since those reintroduced were NOT native to the area, but the larger Canadian breed that is twice the size of the native species.

Anybody want to run into a pack of 200 lb wolves?

I'd rather they allow permit hunting of the elk in the park to reduce the numbers than the slaughter going on with the wolf packs.

JMHO.

Not just your opinion

"Historically, the wolf populations originally native to Yellowstone were classed under the subspecies C. l. irremotus. When the issue of what subspecies to use for the introduction was raised, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service representatives stated that the taxonomy of grey wolves had been revised numerous times, and that C. l. irremotus was not a distinct subspecies, but a geographical variant. Three publications were made on the appropriateness of using a founding population of Canadian wolves: Brewster and Fritz supported the motion, while Nowak determined that the original Yellowstone wolves were more similar to C. l. nubilus, a subspecies already present in Minnesota, and that the Canadian animals proposed by Brewster and Fritz were of the subspecies C. l. occidentalis, a significantly larger animal. The rationale behind Brewster and Fritz's favor was that wolves show little genetic diversity, and that the original population was extinct anyway. This was contradicted by Nowak, who contested that Minnesotan wolves were much more similar in size and shape to the original population than the proposed Canadian wolves, though he conceded that C. l. occidentalis was probably already migrating southward even before human intervention. The final use of Canadian wolves for the reintroduction was not without criticism: the American Society of Mammalogists criticized the project's lack of deference to the principle of Bergmann's rule, pointing out that the wolves used for the introduction were 30% larger than the original park wolves, and were adapted to much colder climates. Finally, the society questioned the legality under the ESA of “recovering” a taxon of wolf by expanding the historic range of a less similar type, when more closely related founder stock still remained available."

[DaSkip]

Originally Posted by Backroad Mike

Any link to some scientific study to backup the claim?

Wolves have decimated elk herd numbers in the region. I had some discussions with Jay while we visited and he's forwarded some rather blatant government abuse of the system to support the reintroduction of wolves. Especially since those reintroduced were NOT native to the area, but the larger Canadian breed that is twice the size of the native species.

Anybody want to run into a pack of 200 lb wolves?

I'd rather they allow permit hunting of the elk in the park to reduce the numbers than the slaughter going on with the wolf packs.

JMHO.

Originally Posted by vafatboy

Not just your opinion

"Historically, the wolf populations originally native to Yellowstone were classed under the subspecies C. l. irremotus. When the issue of what subspecies to use for the introduction was raised, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service representatives stated that the taxonomy of grey wolves had been revised numerous times, and that C. l. irremotus was not a distinct subspecies, but a geographical variant. Three publications were made on the appropriateness of using a founding population of Canadian wolves: Brewster and Fritz supported the motion, while Nowak determined that the original Yellowstone wolves were more similar to C. l. nubilus, a subspecies already present in Minnesota, and that the Canadian animals proposed by Brewster and Fritz were of the subspecies C. l. occidentalis, a significantly larger animal. The rationale behind Brewster and Fritz's favor was that wolves show little genetic diversity, and that the original population was extinct anyway. This was contradicted by Nowak, who contested that Minnesotan wolves were much more similar in size and shape to the original population than the proposed Canadian wolves, though he conceded that C. l. occidentalis was probably already migrating southward even before human intervention. The final use of Canadian wolves for the reintroduction was not without criticism: the American Society of Mammalogists criticized the project's lack of deference to the principle of Bergmann's rule, pointing out that the wolves used for the introduction were 30% larger than the original park wolves, and were adapted to much colder climates. Finally, the society questioned the legality under the ESA of “recovering” a taxon of wolf by expanding the historic range of a less similar type, when more closely related founder stock still remained available."

This link says that they are only 30% larger, not twice as big.

[vafatboy]

Originally Posted by DaSkip

This link says that they are only 30% larger, not twice as big.

They estimated the wolfs would kill 12 elk per yer per wolf. The numbers are in and it's 24 elk per year per wolf, plus livestock.

[DaSkip]

What was the elk herd level before they killed all the wolves seventy years ago?

Where's the anger over killing Grizzly Bears in the 60's and 70's.

The problem lies with people messing with the natural balance of nature.

[griffin]

Originally Posted by DaSkip

What was the elk herd level before they killed all the wolves seventy years ago?

Where's the anger over killing Grizzly Bears in the 60's and 70's.

The problem lies with people messing with the natural balance of nature.

Amen

[Backroad Mike]

Originally Posted by DaSkip

This link says that they are only 30% larger, not twice as big.

My mistake.

[DaSkip]

http://wiwildlifeethic.org/2012/06/2...as-scapegoats/

[stupidglide]

Originally Posted by DaSkip

.........................The problem lies with people messing with the natural balance of nature.

Truer words, never spoken..................

Nature abhors a vacuum, and ALWAYS finds a balance. EVERY time.

[fred1369]

small wolves good (eat deer) , big wolves bad (eat elk)

[Infidel!]

I was outside having a cigar last night and heard a wolf howl on the ranch behind us. I thought it was pretty cool.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by DaSkip

What was the elk herd level before they killed all the wolves seventy years ago?

Where's the anger over killing Grizzly Bears in the 60's and 70's.

The problem lies with people messing with the natural balance of nature.

Quite true, and I could see how it all could happen.

All the critters were there before man arrived, and they survived. The deer, elk, wolves, bears, and etc all coexisted and maintained their own balance. Upset that balance and sets off a chain of events.

Wondering why they replaced the wolves with the larger Canadian ones, as opposed to the native breed.