Coyotes and Deer

[westcliffe01]

Gerold, that is why I specifically said wolves outside Yellowstone. That is a very large national park, and the wolf is not the top predator. And there are certainly no cattle or other ranchers living in it. But that does not apply to Montana or Wyoming, for example. Cattle ranching is a hard life, is not very profitable (anymore in the global economy) and requires large amounts of capital. If one sells a large cattle ranch today to a developer, it is impossible to restore the land afterwards. The first thing the developer does is sell the water rights, and once you have done that, the land use will never be the same again. So in many ways, the large cattle operations out west are protectors of the land and keeping large tracts accessible for wildlife of all types.

That was actually working quite well until the wolves came along. Since wolves are again a part of the landscape, the financial losses to the ranchers have increased substantially. Anyone who thinks we don't need to care about the ranchers is making a big mistake. Every rancher that quits and takes the "easy money" by selling to a developer results in more subdivisions and more destruction of otherwise natural habitat. I think a lot of people simply don't understand the role that is played by ranchers in being stewards of the land and the preservation of habitat.

I saw a program on PBS a while back on Yellowstone. Without wolves the elk overgrazed severely and destoyed all the willow and other wetland shrubs. Beaver and beaverponds disappeared and all the small game associated with them. When the wolves were reintroduced that controlled the elk. Beavers had their willows, birch, and other young trees. New ponds got built, small game moved in. In short controlling the elk had a ripple effect resulting in a much more diverse habitat for many animals. If you just want to consider only what is good for elk hunters then maybe wolves are bad, but trout fishing, small game and bird hunting all improved. Elk and wolves, deer and coyotes have all lived quite well without man needing to 'manage' one over the other...

 

[Mud Mechanik]

I bet releasing a live wolf out of a leg hold trap is a hoot! not

I'd like to see a video of that too!

 

[N80]

N80 George,

By your way of looking at things, any one thing said that is a generalization with an exception means it is all just wrong. You said small pox was virus we eliminated, you were wrong.

First off, my point, as I've explained numerous times, was not to prove that we have eradicated a species. The point is that we try to and we do it with broad political consent. If you wish to keep pounding your chest about small pox that is fine, but it just goes to show how badly you miss the point.

Here are some more conservatives at work

So what? I have never argued that conservatives often oppose environmental legislation. They do. Often with good reason, often not. But that has never been my point. My point has simply been to demonstrate that your contention that liberals are the sole force for good, decent and effective environmental measures is patently false. I have given concrete examples of conservatives making major, significant, game changing environmental and conservation contributions. That alone refutes your entire argument as you posed it in your initial post. If you wish to modify your argument, feel free to do so. If you do not then you are simply refusing to accept simple logic. No number of examples of conservatives behaving badly is going to change that (especially since that can be matched, number-for-number, by liberals behaving equally badly, right?).

Who would be in the way of that regulation? A liberal? Generally not, George.

So you are saying that no liberals oppose environmental legislation? You seem to live in an almost cartoon-like world of good guys and bad guys. I'm not going to do the legwork for you but you need to do a little bit of study about how modern legislation comes about. Its kind of like making sausage. It isn't pretty and it is often composed of some pretty unpalatable practices on both sides of the isle. And this is THE issue that I take exception with. You see liberals always in unstained white suits and conservative always in filthy black. Again, it is sad and oh so naive.

You are making silly statements about harm and no harm, Exxon and Sierra.

Not at all. Harmful process can either be permitted and regulated, permitted without regulation or banned. Will you claim that we should ban all harmful processes? If not then you must pick one of the two remaining options. It is just that simple.

Where would Ducks Unlimited be without the work of many biologists and environmentalists?

I don't know but what you seem to be suggesting that those biologists and environmentalists were de facto liberals? I'm very close friends with a top notch waterfowl biologist. He's far more conservative than I am. No, really, its true........

George, you are defending the indefensible

My basic argument with your initial statement is bullet proof. It needs no further defending.

and calling on God isn't going to change that.

When did I call on God to defend any statement I have made? You misread me constantly and consistently.....and I suspect intentionally.

When did I call on God?

 

[sdkubota]

Research "Agenda 21" if you want to know what is in store for the future regarding man encroaching on nature.

 

[dave1949]

First off, my point, as I've explained numerous times, was not to prove that we have eradicated a species. The point is that we try to and we do it with broad political consent. If you wish to keep pounding your chest about small pox that is fine, but it just goes to show how badly you miss the point.



So what? I have never argued that conservatives often oppose environmental legislation. They do. Often with good reason, often not. But that has never been my point. My point has simply been to demonstrate that your contention that liberals are the sole force for good, decent and effective environmental measures is patently false. I have given concrete examples of conservatives making major, significant, game changing environmental and conservation contributions. That alone refutes your entire argument as you posed it in your initial post. If you wish to modify your argument, feel free to do so. If you do not then you are simply refusing to accept simple logic. No number of examples of conservatives behaving badly is going to change that (especially since that can be matched, number-for-number, by liberals behaving equally badly, right?).



So you are saying that no liberals oppose environmental legislation? You seem to live in an almost cartoon-like world of good guys and bad guys. I'm not going to do the legwork for you but you need to do a little bit of study about how modern legislation comes about. Its kind of like making sausage. It isn't pretty and it is often composed of some pretty unpalatable practices on both sides of the isle. And this is THE issue that I take exception with. You see liberals always in unstained white suits and conservative always in filthy black. Again, it is sad and oh so naive.



Not at all. Harmful process can either be permitted and regulated, permitted without regulation or banned. Will you claim that we should ban all harmful processes? If not then you must pick one of the two remaining options. It is just that simple.



I don't know but what you seem to be suggesting that those biologists and environmentalists were de facto liberals? I'm very close friends with a top notch waterfowl biologist. He's far more conservative than I am. No, really, its true........



My basic argument with your initial statement is bullet proof. It needs no further defending.



When did I call on God to defend any statement I have made? You misread me constantly and consistently.....and I suspect intentionally.

When did I call on God?

I think there is a lot of that going around. Okay, can we agree to disagree in peace? This horse is starting to smell bad.

 

[westcliffe01]

Nice 40lb coyote that someone took in the last few days...

 

[westcliffe01]

True to the original topic, here is video of 2 coyotes taking down a young buck.

 

[CurlyDave]

I bet releasing a live wolf out of a leg hold trap is a hoot! not

When I saw the picture, I wondered how he was going to release it. Anybody have any good ideas?

 

[tungularafishcamp]

I have gotten foxes and an otter out of nets by wacking them them at the base of the snout firmly with an ax handle or similar, it knocks them out for @ 15 minutes. Did have one fox die from it but other than that all have been fine. Be a challenge to hit a wolf that way that can move around a bit tho, pretty easy when something is wrapped up in a net.

 

[Tororider]

My guess is he had a good catch pole. Still wouldn't make me comfortable.