Quote:
Originally Posted by Rikao4
Thanks Jeff..
elk and deer up in certain areas = wolves hunted to extinction..
Hunt and Game did a poor job regulating # of wolves killed when they had control...= allowed killing to the point of extinction..
and folks will always side with the critter being hunted from a plane..
Rika
|
The key is balanced management, Rika. Wolves (and other large predators, such as the California grizzly) were hunted into near extinction
before there was any semblance of modern game management. As a matter of fact, so were deer, elk, moose, and other game animals. These tragedies are a large part of
why we have developed management philosophies based upon sound biology and sustainable numbers. Game biologists now estimate there are more deer and elk in North America than when the Pilgrims landed. No kidding. Modern game management has been that successful. And every last bit of it has been paid for by hunters, through license and tag fees, and taxes levied on their gear under the Pitman-Robertson act.
Wolves need to be brought in as a part of that in the lower 48, just as they are in Alaska. With no "endangered" status placed upon Alaskan wolves, the state is free to manage their populations just as they are free to manage other animals' populations. It works quite well up there.
Oh, and by the way, no one
hunts wolves from helicopters. Game agents and hired guns
shoot plenty of wolves from helicopters, true. In the vast, remote areas in which they are managing animal populations, there really is no other way. It is not meant to be sporting in any way, shape, or form. It's meant to be
efficient and as cost-effective as possible. Alaskan taxpayers and hunters are footing the bill, after all. Game biologists identify a need to reduce wolf numbers in a given area, and they get it done. It's not pretty. It's not meant to be, and, frankly, they don't care.
Affected states in the lower 48 are simply pleading for the same authority in managing their populations. The wolf is, today, and uncontrolled "wild card" in the greater scheme of game management for these states. If they were not an extremely effective top-tier predator, things may be different. But they are. And, as such, they have a profound affect upon other animals that must be mitigated and brought under control. By game management professionals, not the courts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckterrier
Is that why in the 1800's there were millions of friggin' buffalo?????? Oh wait it was homo sapiens that damn near killed them off.
****ing sickening, and yeah that's a quote.
|
Yes, they did. In a purely political effort directed at stripping the native population of one of its key elements of survival and independence. And, incidentally, long before we ever thought of any sort of game management. Not that it would have mattered if we had, as these were by no means sport hunters out to fill a tag. They were market hunters at first (since made illegal in this country for any sort of game) and then, when the markets dried up, they were simply collecting bounties that were paid by our government.
What on earth does any of that have to do with our wolf situation?