Wolves

[NJTroutbum]

Yes Ed, they did. Hunters by nature take the biggest, healthest and best of the species they hunt for, which in turn leaves the weaker and smaller, to contribute to the gene pool. Wolves by nature, take the weakest and smallest...improving the gene pool. You don't need to be a genius to figure that out.

I believe that is a very broad and inaccurate statement. But I can understand how somebody could come to that conclusion with TV hunting shows and the greater publicity given to the taking of the herd bulls and mature buck. But over all, that is not the case. Its actually a VERY small percentage of the overall harvest. Game managers provide far more doe and cow licenses than buck/bull in an effort to keep a balanced herd. Most are no more than 1 1/2yr animals and are the first legal bull/buck opportunity for the average hunter. Likewise, doe/cow tags are most often taken first-come-first-serve strictly for the purpose of management and the freezer.

On the side of the wolves....it sounds great when people say wolves only kill the weak and sickly. As if they were simply an over grown opposum with a different tail. But that is not the cass either. Blackbear, wolves and coyote all have a huge impact on calving and fawn mortallity. And there is no culling involved. Nor are there any antlers with which to identify them with. They take all opportunities available, cow and bull calves alike. Herds are not getting knocked down simply because they are getting weak and helpless. They are "preyed' upon by predators. Sick and healthy.

Yellowstone didn't get overbrowsed because of the lack of wolves. It became overbrowsed by the lack of game management. Protectionism of game is not management. They are an animal, and eventually eat themselves out of house and home, or breed themselves into disease. Yes, yellowstone has been "preserved"....but in a man-impacted ecosystem and within man-made boundaries.

[Kerry Stratton]

As a long-time technical writer I admit completely to a tendency to write as clearly as possible which is often taken the way you suggest. All I can do is assure you it was not meant that way and I relish good solid argument and debate... I can even handle name calling, coming and going... The comment about a specious argument was directed at the comment that KS made about predators would have wiped out the prey.

But FAOL has made it clear enough to me that they do not want such argument here, so I am playing by their rules.

If anyone wants to argue via PM or phone I am more than happy to do so!
art

My statement was merely a way to keep the conversation going. I apologize if it was "specious". NJTroutbum addressed it without ego and made good points to my comments. You sir, merely displayed your incredible ego by dismissing my comments as specious and obviously below you to answer with something to better understand the situation. Whatever. You can keep all of your so called experience and knowledge to yourself. I don't have any use for the way you dispense it anyway.

[hap]

My statement was merely a way to keep the conversation going. I apologize if it was "specious". NJTroutbum addressed it without ego and made good points to my comments. You sir, merely displayed your incredible ego by dismissing my comments as specious and obviously below you to answer with something to better understand the situation. Whatever. You can keep all of your so called experience and knowledge to yourself. I don't have any use for the way you dispense it anyway.

Hard to imagine a better example of why FAOL does not want this stuff here. To avoid long-winded descriptions and arguments is to leave an incredibly complex subject undiscussed... Hope you can unwrinkle the thong...

[rayhill190]

I can't wait til Spring comes.

[jarrettg]

I wonder..... if there was a native catfish that ate or harassed the trout that fly fishers seek. Which greatly reduced the total numbers or how successful we are. Would you support and encourage the over population of those catfish?

Would you be on the same side as the catfish(wolves)?

[NJTroutbum]

The way I see it, WE are the apex predator in the equation. They want to "re-introduce" another diminished predator back into the ecosystem, and not allow the top predator to control their numbers. Closing the entire area of Yellowstone to managed hunting all those years caused this entire issue.

JarretG your question is spot-on. Case in point, the Squawfish. I've seen many a fly fisherman tossing them back over their shoulders into the brush. Why?...because they clean out redds.

[Kerry Stratton]

Hard to imagine a better example of why FAOL does not want this stuff here. To avoid long-winded descriptions and arguments is to leave an incredibly complex subject undiscussed... Hope you can unwrinkle the thong...

Sorry, no thong. Another egotistical and insulting reply.

[lastchance]

Wow! Maybe we should close this thread?

[Betty Hiner]

Has no one else noticed that these are elk and not deer? Or does that not matter? While a beautiful film to look at, might there be other "inconsistencies" there, too? Or does that not matter either?