FARK.com: (7387329) Having successfully restored the Gray Wolf into the environment, Minnesota to celebrate by killing them all off again

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		Having successfully restored the Gray Wolf into the environment, Minnesota to celebrate by killing them all off again (startribune.com)		91
		More: Sad, Minnesota, environments

• • •

6370 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Oct 2012 at 1:43 AM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7387329

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

91 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

fusillade762		2012-10-18 12:09:17 AM

If depredations are not the basis for a hunt, why kill wolves? This is a sport season, pure and simple. Recreational killing.

Killing is fun! YEEE-HAW!

RedPhoenix122		2012-10-18 12:16:36 AM

Bring it!

brap		2012-10-18 12:46:29 AM

Could we maybe rebreed them without that pesky "burning desire to live" thingee?

Ambivalence		2012-10-18 12:47:05 AM

They do that in Alaska as well. They have yearly wolf hunting to thin out their numbers so there's more caribou and other wild game available for hunters to kill.

Because the only REAL Apex predator in nature is man.

vwarb		2012-10-18 01:47:03 AM

How about we allow the wolf hunting season these people so badly desire, but they have to go into the woods with only their hands. They'll of course be allowed to use whatever tools they fashion while hunting, but that's it.

signaljammer		2012-10-18 01:47:12 AM

They were a fad.

MoeSzyslak		2012-10-18 01:49:40 AM

Being a Minnesotan I think I'll wear my favorite shirt everyday in a show of solidarity with the wolves.

www.animalshirts.net

Or I could just continue going on not giving a fark. Yeah I'll do that.

Raoul Eaton		2012-10-18 01:54:17 AM

Ambivalence: They do that in Alaska as well. They have yearly wolf hunting to thin out their numbers so there's more caribou and other wild game available for hunters to kill.

Because the only REAL Apex predator in nature is man.

Yeah, because wolves always go after the alpha male caribou with the big antlers, right?

//well, no, they go after the weak, young, and sick (kind of like Congressional Republicans)
////never cry wolf
///have no idea if that movie was scientifically accurate
//will never ever eat a live mouse, though
/but one never knows what might happen

ozarkmatt		2012-10-18 01:58:30 AM

Raoul Eaton: //well, no, they go after the weak, young, and sick (kind of like Congressional Republicans)

Dick.

I sound fat		2012-10-18 02:01:46 AM

ozarkmatt: Raoul Eaton: //well, no, they go after the weak, young, and sick (kind of like Congressional Republicans)

Dick.

They go after Dick like congressional republicans?

AverageAmericanGuy		2012-10-18 02:01:53 AM

Do your worst, you farking Minnesota pissants.

Tatterdemalian		2012-10-18 02:05:15 AM

brap: Could we maybe rebreed them without that pesky "burning desire to live" thingee?

That's called "domestication," and PETA says it's bad and wrong.

/funny how quickly people forget
//they forgot how destructive wolves were as soon as they were gone, and they're forgetting how sad and guilty they felt now that they're back

Pray 4 Mojo		2012-10-18 02:12:34 AM

":A few facts -- the wolf population has been stable since 1998 without hunting or trapping. The last Minnesota population survey was completed in 2007, and it established a population range from 2,100 to 3,500 wolves. This year, 400 wolves are expected to be killed during the scheduled season. Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls, plus an estimated 300 more will be killed illegally."

Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

Satyagraha		2012-10-18 02:14:50 AM

FTA:
"During the government shutdown of 2011, the compromise five-year wait was stripped away by the (Republican)Legislature. The State Capitol building was closed to the public when the final language was approved."

images.sodahead.com

/They're just animals for gods sake

Lionel Mandrake		2012-10-18 02:18:57 AM

fusillade762: If depredations are not the basis for a hunt, why kill wolves? This is a sport season, pure and simple. Recreational killing.

Killing is fun! YEEE-HAW!

Well, that and it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that one has an extraordinarily enormous penis I'm talking HUGE!! Like, it has to ride shotgun in the Humvee

Pray 4 Mojo		2012-10-18 02:27:59 AM

ladyfortuna		2012-10-18 02:33:36 AM

Satyagraha: FTA:
"During the government shutdown of 2011, the compromise five-year wait was stripped away by the (Republican)Legislature. The State Capitol building was closed to the public when the final language was approved."

[images.sodahead.com image 350x342]

/They're just animals for gods sake

They're predators, which in turn keep the other species in check (barring of course random factors like a disease or drought/flood year that keeps their prey at lower populations). They were hunted nearly to extinction in the upper mid-west early last century or so (can't remember exactly since my research paper was done in 2006).

Ranchers biatch about them because of the (potential) economic loss, but in terms of balancing the ecosystem, all predators are invaluable. Humans are the interlopers in their natural territory, not the other way around.

fusillade762		2012-10-18 02:37:28 AM

valar_morghulis		2012-10-18 02:37:35 AM

They need to be relisted on TESA.

thismomentinblackhistory		2012-10-18 02:41:20 AM

fusillade762: vwarb: How about we allow the wolf hunting season these people so badly desire, but they have to go into the woods with only their hands. They'll of course be allowed to use whatever tools they fashion while hunting, but that's it.

Finally! This should have been the Boobies.

CipollinaFan		2012-10-18 02:44:10 AM

Is that how Kevin Love broke his hand?

Gawdzila		2012-10-18 02:46:53 AM

Pray 4 Mojo: Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

Frankly the specific numbers don't matter all that much. If there is an important apex predator whose populations, numbering only two or three thousand, are only just recovered after being hunted nearly to extinction -- AND it is already very likely that some will be killed due to livestock depredation laws -- it seems plainly obvious that we should restrict any other activity that will have any impact on their numbers. Their population is not large, even now; WHY should we be allowing people to shoot them at all??

Gawdzila		2012-10-18 02:48:37 AM

Satyagraha: /They're just animals for gods sake

Sounds like someone doesn't appreciate nature.

/Or understand ecosystems

Jimmysolson		2012-10-18 03:06:14 AM

If it's any consolation, it costs like $30 whole dollars, if you win the lottery and are a resident. $250 for non-residents.

Too old, no longer a hunter.
Would only hunt food.

That's okay isn't it?

simplicimus		2012-10-18 03:11:19 AM

Pray 4 Mojo: ":A few facts -- the wolf population has been stable since 1998 without hunting or trapping. The last Minnesota population survey was completed in 2007, and it established a population range from 2,100 to 3,500 wolves. This year, 400 wolves are expected to be killed during the scheduled season. Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls, plus an estimated 300 more will be killed illegally."

Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

So they're planning to wipe out 1/2 to 1/3 of the population? Sounds genetically sound to me.
/not

Mitch Mitchell		2012-10-18 03:16:24 AM

Have you ever tasted wolf? It's kind of like doberman with a little bit of squirrel thrown in.

TomD9938		2012-10-18 03:18:19 AM

"Just stay still and they wont see us."

simplicimus		2012-10-18 03:20:22 AM

"Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls."
Too bad there isn't a breed of dog that can be used to protect livestock.

homelessdude		2012-10-18 03:24:50 AM

% of cattle population killed and eaten by wolves last year - 00.000000001%
% of cattle population killed and eaten by people last year - 99.999999999%.

If I were a cow, it would not be wolves that I would be worried about.

Jest sayin'

Gyrfalcon		2012-10-18 03:45:07 AM

In Yellowstone, the pronghorn population is critically endangered. Turns out one reason is that coyotes will hunt and kill the calves. The female pronghorns leave newborn calves hidden in the grass while they are grazing, until the calves can keep up with the herd. Coyotes come along and kill the calves. The small (newborn) calves are only big enough to feed a small family pack of coyotes, hence a lot of coyotes can devastate a calving ground.

Since the calves are so small, they are not favorite prey of the wolf packs; however, the coyotes stay away from areas where the wolves have established themselves. Result: The pronghorn calves have a chance to grow up and replenish the herd. A larger wolf pack will not need to eat more than a few pronghorns, since they'd rather take bigger prey (elk, bison) when they can. The net result is that more wolves = more pronghorn.

Funny how that works out.

simplicimus		2012-10-18 03:55:04 AM

Gyrfalcon: In Yellowstone, the pronghorn population is critically endangered. Turns out one reason is that coyotes will hunt and kill the calves. The female pronghorns leave newborn calves hidden in the grass while they are grazing, until the calves can keep up with the herd. Coyotes come along and kill the calves. The small (newborn) calves are only big enough to feed a small family pack of coyotes, hence a lot of coyotes can devastate a calving ground.

Since the calves are so small, they are not favorite prey of the wolf packs; however, the coyotes stay away from areas where the wolves have established themselves. Result: The pronghorn calves have a chance to grow up and replenish the herd. A larger wolf pack will not need to eat more than a few pronghorns, since they'd rather take bigger prey (elk, bison) when they can. The net result is that more wolves = more pronghorn.

Funny how that works out.

Ecosystems. How do they work?

Pray 4 Mojo		2012-10-18 03:56:02 AM

simplicimus: Pray 4 Mojo: ":A few facts -- the wolf population has been stable since 1998 without hunting or trapping. The last Minnesota population survey was completed in 2007, and it established a population range from 2,100 to 3,500 wolves. This year, 400 wolves are expected to be killed during the scheduled season. Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls, plus an estimated 300 more will be killed illegally."

Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

So they're planning to wipe out 1/2 to 1/3 of the population? Sounds genetically sound to me.
/not

According to numbers apparently pulled from the ass of the person that wrote this.

That's the problem.

KrispyKritter		2012-10-18 03:58:26 AM

Gawdzila: Satyagraha: /They're just animals for gods sake

Sounds like someone doesn't appreciate nature.

/Or understand ecosystems

if we don't kill them they will die!

Mid_mo_mad_man		2012-10-18 03:58:33 AM

Regular sport hunting of wolves will allow their numbers to grow and secure their surviving into the future. Its already happen with deer, elk, bears and turkeys in the USA. Sport Hunters not tree huggers tend to be the best stewards of nature. Remember Roosevelt, Audubon, and the other pillars of conservation in America were big game hunters

simplicimus		2012-10-18 04:02:01 AM

BolloxReader		2012-10-18 05:04:47 AM

Pray 4 Mojo: simplicimus: Pray 4 Mojo: ":A few facts -- the wolf population has been stable since 1998 without hunting or trapping. The last Minnesota population survey was completed in 2007, and it established a population range from 2,100 to 3,500 wolves. This year, 400 wolves are expected to be killed during the scheduled season. Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls, plus an estimated 300 more will be killed illegally."

Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

So they're planning to wipe out 1/2 to 1/3 of the population? Sounds genetically sound to me.
/not

According to numbers apparently pulled from the ass of the person that wrote this.

That's the problem.

They know about how many wolves are poached. People have already been poaching them, like they poach every animal.

They know about how many wolves are killed for killing cattle each year.

They know how many licenses are being handed out for hunters to hunt wolves. They are guessing how many wolves will be taken.

It looks like they can account for about 600 wolves outside of ordinary game hunting. I don't know how they are estimating the game hunting-- only one per hunter, only so many licenses, and a certain percent will be successful, perhaps? Or perhaps they are allowing a total of 400 wolves to be taken legally, first come first served. Not a hunter, so I don't know how they balance such things out but I know that in Indiana they estimate how many deer will be killed when they allow deer hunting in state parks. Someone's got a formula.

Anyway, I know the first two numbers are easily projected because they have already been doing those things.

Skr		2012-10-18 05:12:46 AM

I have seen the billboards about this for a while now. Was wondering what it was all about. Sounded like some nutter shiat on the billboards "Stop the DNR from killing the Wolves" but it seems like the licenses are going to actually go out . Meh I don't think the hunting should happen, nor do I think they should have been removed from protected status. Does anything good come out of the government when the public is locked out? Seems the locking out itself is nefarious at the least.

Anyways, I haven't checked out the wolves at the Minnesota Zoo for a while, but the couple that live in Como seem to be pretty cool. White one that is always chilling out and a grey one that loves pacing. Arctic Foxes there are a blast as well. They REALLY love the white bunnies they are given to eat.

Mid_mo_mad_man		2012-10-18 05:23:50 AM

BolloxReader: Pray 4 Mojo: simplicimus: Pray 4 Mojo: ":A few facts -- the wolf population has been stable since 1998 without hunting or trapping. The last Minnesota population survey was completed in 2007, and it established a population range from 2,100 to 3,500 wolves. This year, 400 wolves are expected to be killed during the scheduled season. Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls, plus an estimated 300 more will be killed illegally."

Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

So they're planning to wipe out 1/2 to 1/3 of the population? Sounds genetically sound to me.
/not

According to numbers apparently pulled from the ass of the person that wrote this.

That's the problem.

They know about how many wolves are poached. People have already been poaching them, like they poach every animal.

They know about how many wolves are killed for killing cattle each year.

They know how many licenses are being handed out for hunters to hunt wolves. They are guessing how many wolves will be taken.

It looks like they can account for about 600 wolves outside of ordinary game hunting. I don't know how they are estimating the game hunting-- only one per hunter, only so many licenses, and a certain percent will be successful, perhaps? Or perhaps they are allowing a total of 400 wolves to be taken legally, first come first served. Not a hunter, so I don't know how they balance such things out but I know that in Indiana they estimate how many deer will be killed when they allow deer hunting in state parks. Someone's got a formula.

Anyway, I know the first two numbers are easily projected because they have already been doing those things.

Turning wolves into game will ensure less poaching. Big game hunters tend to police themselves very well and will not stand for stealing/poaching of animals. Hunting of wolves will also prevent livestock predation. Wolves need to fear man for their own good

Subtle_Canary		2012-10-18 05:59:27 AM

vwarb: How about we allow the wolf hunting season these people so badly desire, but they have to go into the woods with only their hands. They'll of course be allowed to use whatever tools they fashion while hunting, but that's it.

Weak argument. Nature gifted wolves enhanced hearing, superior smell, night vision, and fangs. Nature gifted humans the ability to pre-plan. A human hunters ability comes with caveat that we wont enter a hunt until we are assured success. Just like a Wolf hunting a sick caribou with 12 of his friends.
There's no fair fights unless by fair the wolf and the human are placed in a stadium at noon and the wolf has his fangs filed and mace applied to his face.

Id watch that.

kendelrio		2012-10-18 06:08:50 AM

simplicimus: Mid_mo_mad_man: Regular sport hunting of wolves will allow their numbers to grow and secure their surviving into the future. Its already happen with deer, elk, bears and turkeys in the USA. Sport Hunters not tree huggers tend to be the best stewards of nature. Remember Roosevelt, Audubon, and the other pillars of conservation in America were big game hunters

I understand your point of view, but even without human intervention, the populations would stabilize.

Sort of like how the white-tail deer has?

Link

Link

Pray 4 Mojo		2012-10-18 06:24:17 AM

Mid_mo_mad_man: BolloxReader: Pray 4 Mojo: simplicimus: Pray 4 Mojo: ":A few facts -- the wolf population has been stable since 1998 without hunting or trapping. The last Minnesota population survey was completed in 2007, and it established a population range from 2,100 to 3,500 wolves. This year, 400 wolves are expected to be killed during the scheduled season. Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls, plus an estimated 300 more will be killed illegally."

Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

So they're planning to wipe out 1/2 to 1/3 of the population? Sounds genetically sound to me.
/not

According to numbers apparently pulled from the ass of the person that wrote this.

That's the problem.

They know about how many wolves are poached. People have already been poaching them, like they poach every animal.

They know about how many wolves are killed for killing cattle each year.

They know how many licenses are being handed out for hunters to hunt wolves. They are guessing how many wolves will be taken.

It looks like they can account for about 600 wolves outside of ordinary game hunting. I don't know how they are estimating the game hunting-- only one per hunter, only so many licenses, and a certain percent will be successful, perhaps? Or perhaps they are allowing a total of 400 wolves to be taken legally, first come first served. Not a hunter, so I don't know how they balance such things out but I know that in Indiana they estimate how many deer will be killed when they allow deer hunting in state parks. Someone's got a formula.

Anyway, I know the first two numbers are easily projected because they have already been doing those things.

Turning wolves into game will ensure less poaching. Big game hunters tend to police themselves very well and will not stand for stealing/poaching of animals. Hunting of w ...

Yep.

Even if those numbers are completely accurate... they are dependent figures. Also... the data I looked up pretty quick show that the population increased 20% from 1998 to 2007. So the "facts" in this piece setting off my bullshiat detector appears to be valid.

Write all the op-ed pieces you want if you're trying to save the wolves. I got no issue with that... but if you're going to lay out "facts"... then farking back them up. Making up fairy tales only weakens your position.

And I would guess... if this were an editorial about the need to have the population of wolves thinned out and laying out 'facts' that are not backed up... the Fark tree hugger patrol would be here ripping it apart. Just cause it backs your position doesn't make it okay.

/Have hunted wolves
//Never saw one the whole time
///it was cold

TenJed_77		2012-10-18 06:34:10 AM

kendelrio: simplicimus: Mid_mo_mad_man: Regular sport hunting of wolves will allow their numbers to grow and secure their surviving into the future. Its already happen with deer, elk, bears and turkeys in the USA. Sport Hunters not tree huggers tend to be the best stewards of nature. Remember Roosevelt, Audubon, and the other pillars of conservation in America were big game hunters

I understand your point of view, but even without human intervention, the populations would stabilize.

Sort of like how the white-tail deer has?

Link

Link

And this is because we eliminated most of the other predators.

jaybeezey		2012-10-18 06:41:46 AM

Gawdzila: Pray 4 Mojo: Pro-tip:

If you're trying to convince me your position is correct... when you provide "facts"... you should... you know... show me that you didn't pull numbers out of your butt.

Frankly the specific numbers don't matter all that much. If there is an important apex predator whose populations, numbering only two or three thousand, are only just recovered after being hunted nearly to extinction -- AND it is already very likely that some will be killed due to livestock depredation laws -- it seems plainly obvious that we should restrict any other activity that will have any impact on their numbers. Their population is not large, even now; WHY should we be allowing people to shoot them at all??

You silly sons of biatches! This is about showing the wolves who boss. Make sure they don't get too comfortable with us and start eating your babies out of your front yard.

Another Government Employee		2012-10-18 07:25:27 AM

simplicimus: "Another 300 will be killed legally under livestock depredation controls."
Too bad there isn't a breed of dog that can be used to protect livestock.

Wolves will generally beat dogs in a battle. At best, the pack will move to an easier target.

Ex-Texan		2012-10-18 07:31:09 AM

Here in New Mexico, they reintroduced the Mexican Gray Wolf, but you still get news articles about how ranchers say they are a menace, and lot of them get shot on sight, even though they are supposedly protected. *sigh*

Happy Hours		2012-10-18 07:37:46 AM

homelessdude: % of cattle population killed and eaten by wolves last year - 00.000000001%
% of cattle population killed and eaten by people last year - 99.999999999%.

If I were a cow, it would not be wolves that I would be worried about.

Jest sayin'

Would you rather be killed by wolves or be knocked unconscious by a quick blow to the head before having your throat cut?

vwarb		2012-10-18 07:42:21 AM

Subtle_Canary: vwarb: How about we allow the wolf hunting season these people so badly desire, but they have to go into the woods with only their hands. They'll of course be allowed to use whatever tools they fashion while hunting, but that's it.

Weak argument. Nature gifted wolves enhanced hearing, superior smell, night vision, and fangs. Nature gifted humans the ability to pre-plan. A human hunters ability comes with caveat that we wont enter a hunt until we are assured success. Just like a Wolf hunting a sick caribou with 12 of his friends.
There's no fair fights unless by fair the wolf and the human are placed in a stadium at noon and the wolf has his fangs filed and mace applied to his face.

Id watch that.

As someone said upthread, humans are the only real "apex predator." The rest of nature exists solely by our decision to preserve it. If we're going to just kill things for fun when we have absolutely no chance of failure, then let's stop being coy and just wipe all the other animals out. Or, if we're going to claim we're killing for sport, let's make it actually sporting.

/I always feel like I seem way too hostile when people can't hear my voice.

fozziewazzi		2012-10-18 08:33:43 AM

Mid_mo_mad_man: Regular sport hunting of wolves will allow their numbers to grow and secure their surviving into the future. Its already happen with deer, elk, bears and turkeys in the USA. Sport Hunters not tree huggers tend to be the best stewards of nature. Remember Roosevelt, Audubon, and the other pillars of conservation in America were big game hunters

Many hunters have a different notion of what the stewardship of nature entails. Among other things is making sure the lucrative hunting industry is not impacted. To that end the numbers of competitor species (cougars and wolves especially) are controlled not to achieve natural balance, but to allow for sufficient game for sports hunters. Nature isn't so much protected as 'managed'.