How Wolves Change Rivers

brianlux

We've had so many heartbreaking stories here about the loss of wildlife and terrible fate of some animals so it was really heartening to see this 4 minute video about wolves a friend sent to me. Really good stuff here!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q

polaris_x

thanks for that ... it really just reiterates what people need to understand about nature and the environment ... it's all interconnected and at the end of the day - nature seeks balance ... much of the problems we have locally and globally are the result of that balance being put off kilter ...

unsung

I don't know, I lean anti-wolf. I at least believe there should be culls. It's a controversial topic.

The following link is GRAPHIC.

http://www.revrealty.us/SaveOurElk.pdf

I can't get on board with full wolf protection.

polaris_x

oh dear ... like you got like some real science than a piece made by some guy? ... frig ... one of the pictures showed a dog tied to a chain that was supposedly killed by a wolf ... well, guess what - if you tie up your dog outside ... you are sacrificing your pet ...

is the motivation to protect elk so you guys can shoot more of them?

http://digitaljournal.com/news/environment/idaho-game-management-killing-elk-after-killing-wolves/article/367461

chadwick

killing wolves is fucking dumb dumb dumb

i believe that asshole in alaska, her & all her idiots up there, they shoot them from helicopters
what a wonderful group

brianlux

I great teacher of mine was told me that when wolves in a family or group come together after being apart even for a short while they lick each others faces to show affection. How the fuck do you "cull" something that does that?

Figuratively speaking, I would lick your faces, my friends. Please do not shoot me.

unsung

Yes, they are so cute and cuddly. Why, even for a second, consider that maybe they are problems and not just warm and fuzzy.

This forum has basically turned into a my idea is right and yours is wrong and if you disagree with us we will gang up on you and tell you so.

Life must be so entirely boring having everyone agree with your every word.

Cosmo

unsung said:

Yes, they are so cute and cuddly. Why, even for a second, consider that maybe they are problems and not just warm and fuzzy.
This forum has basically turned into a my idea is right and yours is wrong and if you disagree with us we will gang up on you and tell you so.
Life must be so entirely boring having everyone agree with your every word.

...
You can put your violin back in it's case... no persecution going on here.
How about you support some of the slides in your power point presentation?
Like this one:
Myth: Wolves are good for elk populations
Fact: US Fish and Wildlife Service Study
•Elk are the primary prey for wolves, comprising 92 % of kills during the winter.
•Elk decreased significantly from 16,791 in winter 1995 to 8,335 in winter 2004 as the number of wolves increased .
•Kill rates by wolves in winter are 22 Elk per wolf per year –DOUBLE the rate predicted in the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Is it possible that the Elk populations were excessive for the environment between 1995 and 2004 and that the population in now sustainable for the environment? What is the sustainable level for elk populations in the region specified by the information gathered to make up that power point slide?
...
or this one:
Myth: Wolves only kill what they eat
Fact: Wolves are actually the most wasteful predator in the US and kill for sport
Do other carnivores benfit from wolf kills? I mean, are there smaller carnivores, such as foxes and raptors, that are too small to bring down large prey benefitting from winter meals leftover by the wolves? How are those lower predator species doing and will they be impacted by a reduction in the wolf population. Also, what is the determining factor on wasteful predator... are these man's standards, or predator standards? and don't humans, 'Kill for Sport', too? Is that a negative?
..
And it is like any predator... we place our pets in danger of becoming prey when we move into those lands patrolled by predators. Like, here in Southern California... we expand housing developments into the foothills patrolled by mountain lions... then, complain when mountain lions eat our house cats.

polaris_x

hey ... someone actually introducing science and critical thinking!?? ... no ... say it isn't so!! ... i guess unsung didn't read the report where ranchers had to ask for elk to be killed because they were killing wolves ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Cosmo said:

unsung said:

Yes, they are so cute and cuddly. Why, even for a second, consider that maybe they are problems and not just warm and fuzzy.
This forum has basically turned into a my idea is right and yours is wrong and if you disagree with us we will gang up on you and tell you so.
Life must be so entirely boring having everyone agree with your every word.

...
You can put your violin back in it's case... no persecution going on here.
How about you support some of the slides in your power point presentation?
Like this one:
Myth: Wolves are good for elk populations
Fact: US Fish and Wildlife Service Study
•Elk are the primary prey for wolves, comprising 92 % of kills during the winter.
•Elk decreased significantly from 16,791 in winter 1995 to 8,335 in winter 2004 as the number of wolves increased .
•Kill rates by wolves in winter are 22 Elk per wolf per year –DOUBLE the rate predicted in the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Is it possible that the Elk populations were excessive for the environment between 1995 and 2004 and that the population in now sustainable for the environment? What is the sustainable level for elk populations in the region specified by the information gathered to make up that power point slide?
...
or this one:
Myth: Wolves only kill what they eat
Fact: Wolves are actually the most wasteful predator in the US and kill for sport
Do other carnivores benfit from wolf kills? I mean, are there smaller carnivores, such as foxes and raptors, that are too small to bring down large prey benefitting from winter meals leftover by the wolves? How are those lower predator species doing and will they be impacted by a reduction in the wolf population. Also, what is the determining factor on wasteful predator... are these man's standards, or predator standards? and don't humans, 'Kill for Sport', too? Is that a negative?
..
And it is like any predator... we place our pets in danger of becoming prey when we move into those lands patrolled by predators. Like, here in Southern California... we expand housing developments into the foothills patrolled by mountain lions... then, complain when mountain lions eat our house cats.

An outstanding exhibition of critical thinking skills on display here, Cosmo.

Cosmo

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

An outstanding exhibition of critical thinking skills on display here, Cosmo.

..
Thanx for that, sir... but, not really.
I'm just one of those people who do not take every presentation I see on the interNet as the gospel truth. I try to see what is being present and why. i just try to apply the basic logic I'm tethered to in order to figure out why a point is being presented to me.... and why should i, or should i not blindly accept it as truth.
i don't know how many elk can be supported in a certain environment... and if 16,791 is too many or 8,335 is too little. What is the environment we are talking about... how large/small of a space are we talkng about? Are there rivers, lakes or forests or grasslands or mountainous or plains or deserts or what? There is too little information presented for me to make an informed assessment.
Perhaps some people can draw conclusions from abbreviated data... but, i cannot. I lack the clairvoyance to see what is not there. One thing I do know... most of everything presented is slanted towards the perspective of the person making the arguement. I am certain there are arguements that make a valid point for controllng top predator populations in a specified environment from a scientific standpoint... this example just happens to NOT be one of them.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Cosmo said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

An outstanding exhibition of critical thinking skills on display here, Cosmo.

..
Thanx for that, sir... but, not really.
I'm just one of those people who do not take every presentation I see on the interNet as the gospel truth. I try to see what is being present and why. i just try to apply the basic logic I'm tethered to in order to figure out why a point is being presented to me.... and why should i, or should i not blindly accept it as truth.

Hence, my comment.

Nothing is truly 'cut-and-dried' and the types of questions you posed in response to what was being offered are useful for establishing the complete picture of what might be presented in biased fashion.

brianlux

Maybe if we just gave the natural world a little breathing room, stop being so arrogant as to think we can "manage" or "control" our world (most of the time out of greed and for our own gain) and get away with it and let nature balance itself out. Creating more wild lands and connecting them with wildland corridors would solve a lot of the argument on natures' terms, not ours. That's my take anyway.

And your absolutely right, unsung. You should not believe my every word. I just keep trying to learn and use common sense and do what makes sense. What else can you do?

Thirty Bills, if I understand you right, you are also correct. I have a biased opinion. My bias sides with nature's laws rather than human arrogance in thinking we know better. The only way I can see that being wrong about that is if we could totally subdue nature and still survive. But is that really possible? If so, I'll take my chance with the wolves.

backseatLover12

Beautiful video, I do plan on getting to Yellowstone some day.

Every species has a place in the food chain. Take one out and and the natural cycle of life is disrupted, just like that video explains. To advocate the removal of any one species is to change the cycle of life on this planet. It's just so absurd, it's hard tobelieve anyone would advocate it. Every species is important unless the natural cycle dictates extinction. And wolves aren't extinct.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

brianlux said:

Maybe if we just gave the natural world a little breathing room, stop being so arrogant as to think we can "manage" or "control" our world (most of the time out of greed and for our own gain) and get away with it and let nature balance itself out. Creating more wild lands and connecting them with wildland corridors would solve a lot of the argument on natures' terms, not ours. That's my take anyway.

And your absolutely right, unsung. You should not believe my every word. I just keep trying to learn and use common sense and do what makes sense. What else can you do?

Thirty Bills, if I understand you right, you are also correct. I have a biased opinion. My bias sides with nature's laws rather than human arrogance in thinking we know better. The only way I can see that being wrong about that is if we could totally subdue nature and still survive. But is that really possible? If so, I'll take my chance with the wolves.

I wasn't referring to you specifically, Brian. It would be fair to say that you probably do have a biased opinion, but I would also say that you are open to listening and receiving information that is contrary to your tightly held beliefs.

I'm with you here: when the wolves' natural prey dwindles because of an over-population of wolves... then the wolf population will decrease. The natural prey numbers will rebound and then... the wolves population will flourish once again... only to repeat the same cycle. This is nature and it requires no intervention on our part.

Now, for the record, upon the dwindling food source, if wolves shift their focus from their natural prey to, say, kids at the bus stop... I'm for doing something about that..

polaris_x

backseatLover12 said:

Beautiful video, I do plan on getting to Yellowstone some day.

Every species has a place in the food chain. Take one out and and the natural cycle of life is disrupted, just like that video explains. To advocate the removal of any one species is to change the cycle of life on this planet. It's just so absurd, it's hard tobelieve anyone would advocate it. Every species is important unless the natural cycle dictates extinction. And wolves aren't extinct.

go in the fall ... big parking lot in the summer unless you go into the backcountry ...

unsung

My girlfriend's cousin goes in the dead of winter... by himself. Ex-SEAL, he can handle it.

jmuscatello

unsung said:

Yes, they are so cute and cuddly. Why, even for a second, consider that maybe they are problems and not just warm and fuzzy.

This forum has basically turned into a my idea is right and yours is wrong and if you disagree with us we will gang up on you and tell you so.

Life must be so entirely boring having everyone agree with your every word.

Hey Unsung I agreed with your craft beer thing on the diamonds thread! I figured that might be the only topic we ever actually agreed on, so I made sure to post in support. I was actually kind of excited to find that tiny little piece of common ground. See, we try...