Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The wolves need your help

page: 10
129
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
To those who think wolf hybrids make wonderful pets:

Perhaps they do make great companions and protectors but it is important that they not be allowed to run free.

Why? As a hunter I found a carcass of a deer while hunting. The next day I heard the sounds of dogs fighting and found yet another carcass. Later that week while in a stand a doe ran past me with a huge gash in it's rear leg. Right behind her was a buck who stopped and took a different direction from the doe. Behind the buck came a wolf hybrid loping in easy strides.

This "pet" was running wild and killing deer for the fun of it. It's what large predators do, even if they happen to wear a collar and answer to a name like Sasha.

Large dogs and wolf hybrids should be kept from running loose and terrorizing the local animal population. Please protect your pet and the local wildlife!




posted on May, 6 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


Hi ATA

Sahabi posted this.
"why not safely leave the wolves an offering of slaughter trimmings, put on the furthest area of your property? This concept keeps the deer, raccoons, rabbits, birds, and squirrels out of my garden."

I think thats is an excelent idea and shows a little thought can solve big problems.

I do realise people have to protect their livestock, but I also think the wolves are entitled to be there too. Unlike the wolves we DO have the ability to manage our environment and we should be prepared to find a way that allows the farmer and the wolves to coexist. I confess I dont know the full answer.


Your comments about the wolf hybrids I totaly agree with. I'd go further and suggest they shouldn't be allowed to have them unless they can prove they can control them. I hate all the legislation thats thrown at us these days but they are dangerous animals
We are suffering in the uk right now because people are getting bigger and bigger dogs that they dont know how to handle. Just a couple of weeks ago three policemen ended up in hospital because of this problem.
My own dog who was blind was attacked by one of these large dogs, it grabbed him by the throat and would not let go. I kept telling the owner to make it let go but he was too fightened of his own dog. My dog became lifeless because he could not breath and thats when I stepped in, I kicked this enormous dog about a dozen times before it would let go. When it did let go it dropped my dog into the river and as I pulled him out the other dog went for me. I told the owner to get control of his dog but he was terrified of it. As much as I hated doing it (I'm 6.5ft) wearing work boots, I kicked it as hard as i could in the side of the ribs, only then did it stop attacking us.
I dread to think what would have happened had it been my daughters out there.

This problem is so bad now that most people are now afraid to walk their dogs. I'm glad we havent got those hybrids you speak of over here.



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Wolves need to hunt, they can't survive on scavenging and it would weaken them as a species to leave them easy pickings.

The large dog issue is prevalent here in the run down suburbs where everybody thinks they need a pit bull to be cool or whatever.y
Every week we hear about another toddler being torn to pieces by one, it's horrifying.

I don't envy you having so many large dogs around, that can be a dangerous issue with small children around. Shame you can't legally carry there in the UK. At least here in the US I have the ability to stop a dog if it were attacking someone.
edit on 6-5-2012 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
We all need the help of each one of us ...united we stand, divided we fall, we need to overcome our little differences and share our overwhelmingly big commonalities. One Love ... Beyond any cynicism ... Then not only the wolves will geht the help and respect they need and deserve. But after all, life on earth is also dynamic and we cant conserve each and every species for all time ... In a few hundred Million years living on earth will become quite uncomfortable since the sun starts to get bigger. So what can be the meaning of life in the face of inevitable doom, albeit in a few hundred million years? The only thing worthwhile is the inner world, when used and cleaned properly will also clean the outer world ...



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


I took issue with the "Guardians of the Earth" claim. Nothing more, nothing less. "Guardians of the earth" is thinking that is as equally concieted and faulted as those that think we are supreme to nature, or that "God" likes us best, which is regularly disproved by natural disaster.




Is there another species on Earth that has the same capability in terms of affecting the entire planet as humans? I don't believe in a conscious god I believe that humans can think about things which no other species can comprehend.


I'd say the dinosuars had a profound impact on the ecosystem? I'd also point out that 70% of the earth is water, where as a species we do not occupy or dominate and as far as the "think about things which no other species can comprehend" a case can be made that dolphins or whales feel the same way? Of course we value our own species intellectual ponderings and achievements, but we "value" those things from within our own "value system"...to a dolphin we might be a completely useless species? A dolphin might be confused as to the value of nuclear weapons? Solar energy etc. Technology is a human concept aimed for human purposes.How do we measure "special" as a species? by numbers? by our own biased perspective as "humans"? By our ability to effect the earth or nature? I'd argue in the end, nature still rules. It is a philosophical argument. We might consider ourselves superior to nature, but only by those measures that [we value..other animals likely have a different value system. For example if pure survival or population growth was the measure...then Viruses and bacteria are the most succesful life on earth. We can be in awe that we put a man on the moon, but a racoon might think...how dumb is that? to what use?

All of that said I really enjoy being human and think we have gifts unlike other animals, even if other animals can make the same claim. I think it is always dangerous though to foster conceit as a species though, we are not guardians of the earth, I'll settle for us being as responsible for it as every other form of life. The earth will be here after we are gone, perhaps some other species will fill the void.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


I am not a fan of Wolf-Dog hybrids. I know some think it "cool"..but dogs were domesticated over thousands of years and to mix/dose that domestication with it's wild cousins and to often treat that hybrid as "domesticated" is just asking for trouble in my opinion. There are many documented attacks, even fatalities, with Wolf-dog hybrids. Just my opinion.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

When wolves kill ranch animals I think the Federal government should reimburse the ranchers for their losses. This will remove the economic imperative for these kinds of behaviors. Perhaps this could be funded by adding a box on our tax returns to donate X amount of $ to help save the wolves.


The have and still do. Bias article, but interesting stats...

Livestock Reimbursement For Wolf Predation A Boondoogle
howlingforjustice.wordpress.com...



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I have a close friend who's son was on a school co-op in Canada....wolves killed him. It was horrible. He was told not to go out of the compound alone....he did. Still I do not blame the wolves. Instead of working with the animals, we work against them. Everything in nature is balanced and when we start to disrupt this balance we pay a huge price.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by suzzz
I have a close friend who's son was on a school co-op in Canada....wolves killed him. It was horrible. He was told not to go out of the compound alone....he did. Still I do not blame the wolves. Instead of working with the animals, we work against them. Everything in nature is balanced and when we start to disrupt this balance we pay a huge price.


Interesting and contoversial case with lots of questions...Sorry for your friends loss.

Kenton Joel
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 7-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
This show was one of the best I have seen. It was well filmed, emotive and informative. If you can get a copy WATCH IT ... whether you agree with or against the wolf re-introduction it's well worth a watch.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
the problem isnt wolves

or people, or cattle.

Its this Govts insatiable appetite to OWN every animal that walks the earth. And the land it walks on.

It isnt YOU or ME who wants to manage wildlife! We KNOW whats best-- Harmony. Balance.

Its not crazy to think, If we had the West to do all over again, would we ruin it? Yes, if you let the Feds and international trade Corps run things.

How arrogant to think we can control the animals. Its a God complex IMO.

The Wolf is being used by insane Govt that wants to tattoo and RFID every living thing. Govt is USING the animals for emotional appeal. Because ITS ALL THE KINGS FOREST.

Save the Wolf? We need all need saving. They want us to tally in their account books. No freedom for wolf or man.
edit on 17-5-2012 by rainbowbear because: you know how it is



posted on May, 17 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Id have a big dog too, If I couldnt carry a firearm to protect myself.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


I took issue with the "Guardians of the Earth" claim. Nothing more, nothing less. "Guardians of the earth" is thinking that is as equally concieted and faulted as those that think we are supreme to nature, or that "God" likes us best, which is regularly disproved by natural disaster.




Is there another species on Earth that has the same capability in terms of affecting the entire planet as humans? I don't believe in a conscious god I believe that humans can think about things which no other species can comprehend.


I'd say the dinosuars had a profound impact on the ecosystem? I'd also point out that 70% of the earth is water, where as a species we do not occupy or dominate and as far as the "think about things which no other species can comprehend" a case can be made that dolphins or whales feel the same way? Of course we value our own species intellectual ponderings and achievements, but we "value" those things from within our own "value system"...to a dolphin we might be a completely useless species? A dolphin might be confused as to the value of nuclear weapons? Solar energy etc. Technology is a human concept aimed for human purposes.How do we measure "special" as a species? by numbers? by our own biased perspective as "humans"? By our ability to effect the earth or nature? I'd argue in the end, nature still rules. It is a philosophical argument. We might consider ourselves superior to nature, but only by those measures that [we value..other animals likely have a different value system. For example if pure survival or population growth was the measure...then Viruses and bacteria are the most succesful life on earth. We can be in awe that we put a man on the moon, but a racoon might think...how dumb is that? to what use?

All of that said I really enjoy being human and think we have gifts unlike other animals, even if other animals can make the same claim. I think it is always dangerous though to foster conceit as a species though, we are not guardians of the earth, I'll settle for us being as responsible for it as every other form of life. The earth will be here after we are gone, perhaps some other species will fill the void.



I'm sorry I may have missed something. Which other species is dumping millions of gallons of chemicals in the ocean, habitually? And did a dinosaur ever detonate a nuclear weapon? Oh and another thing, dolphins have never put a serious dent in human populations, so any thing they are thinking about us is almost irrelevant. We can start having the same level of responsibility as every other form of life as soon as we stop destroying all animals living spaces. No owl is ever going to cut down your nest.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by jeantherapy
 


I took issue with the "Guardians of the Earth" claim. Nothing more, nothing less. "Guardians of the earth" is thinking that is as equally concieted and faulted as those that think we are supreme to nature, or that "God" likes us best, which is regularly disproved by natural disaster.




Is there another species on Earth that has the same capability in terms of affecting the entire planet as humans? I don't believe in a conscious god I believe that humans can think about things which no other species can comprehend.


I'd say the dinosuars had a profound impact on the ecosystem? I'd also point out that 70% of the earth is water, where as a species we do not occupy or dominate and as far as the "think about things which no other species can comprehend" a case can be made that dolphins or whales feel the same way? Of course we value our own species intellectual ponderings and achievements, but we "value" those things from within our own "value system"...to a dolphin we might be a completely useless species? A dolphin might be confused as to the value of nuclear weapons? Solar energy etc. Technology is a human concept aimed for human purposes.How do we measure "special" as a species? by numbers? by our own biased perspective as "humans"? By our ability to effect the earth or nature? I'd argue in the end, nature still rules. It is a philosophical argument. We might consider ourselves superior to nature, but only by those measures that [we value..other animals likely have a different value system. For example if pure survival or population growth was the measure...then Viruses and bacteria are the most succesful life on earth. We can be in awe that we put a man on the moon, but a racoon might think...how dumb is that? to what use?

All of that said I really enjoy being human and think we have gifts unlike other animals, even if other animals can make the same claim. I think it is always dangerous though to foster conceit as a species though, we are not guardians of the earth, I'll settle for us being as responsible for it as every other form of life. The earth will be here after we are gone, perhaps some other species will fill the void.



I'm sorry I may have missed something. Which other species is dumping millions of gallons of chemicals in the ocean, habitually? And did a dinosaur ever detonate a nuclear weapon? Oh and another thing, dolphins have never put a serious dent in human populations, so any thing they are thinking about us is almost irrelevant. We can start having the same level of responsibility as every other form of life as soon as we stop destroying all animals living spaces. No owl is ever going to cut down your nest.


Wow...late reply???
"Which other species is dumping millions of gallons of chemicals in the ocean, habitually? "
Fish pee every day.
"And did a dinosaur ever detonate a nuclear weapon?"
They might have if they figured out how to? Either way the natural Meteorites that struck the earth where much more detrimental than nukes.
"Oh and another thing, dolphins have never put a serious dent in human populations"
No, but viruses sure as hell have.
"No owl is ever going to cut down your nest. "
No, but a hurricaine or tsunami might wipe out a few thousand square miles.

First off...lighten up.

Secondly...I never advocated pollution or nukes, (just the opposite) only pointed out that humans too are part of nature. Our pollution will not destroy the earth, the earth has survived much worse than us. What our pollution, nukes etc. will do is destroy us...and that in itself is likely one of nature's natural population control mechanisms.

Again the view that we are somehow "above nature" and it's lords...whether espoused by envirornmentalists or polluters..is arrogance squared and pure idiotic thinking.
edit on 18-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Humans have completely eradicated several species from the face of the Earth. I am having a difficult time understanding why you continue defending the actions that allowed that to happen. It isn't 'nature taking its course' to take more from the earth than you need by mindlessly destroying entire populations of creatures. Now again, which species is threatening the existence of humans? Some virus you love to refer to obtusely?



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeantherapy
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Humans have completely eradicated several species from the face of the Earth. I am having a difficult time understanding why you continue defending the actions that allowed that to happen.


And I am having a difficult time understanding how you think I am defending that?

As to "eradicated several species"...So have comets, ice ages etc. Doesn't mean I am a fan of comet impacts.


Originally posted by jeantherapy
It isn't 'nature taking its course' to take more from the earth than you need by mindlessly destroying entire populations of creatures.


We are nature and nature has natural limiters on our population, whether it be hurricaines, or self inflicted limits via pollution and nuclear weapons. Man is no more capable of destroying nature than an ant can control the rain.

WE...HUMANS...will suffer the consequences of our actions, nature will shake us off like a bad cold. The earth and the universe has survived, well...EVERYTHING...without missing a beat. Nature measures species extinct and new in millenia, not years We are not "caretakers" we do not "rule", we are but a clever ape.
edit on 18-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
All the species on Earth are subject to the effects of hurricanes and meteors, and have always been. Only in the last couple hundred years have humans proliferated their toxic chemicals across the face of the Earth. Birds die because they eat plastic pellets which look like fish eggs. That is not natural! You keep comparing hurricanes to man made disasters, I am telling you they are different. A hurricane probably doesn't think 'I don't need to destroy that, but I will for fun' Humans do, however.



posted on May, 18 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
[

We are nature and nature has natural limiters on our population, whether it be hurricaines, or self inflicted limits via pollution and nuclear weapons. Man is no more capable of destroying nature than an ant can control the rain.



So our population increase has stopped? The Earth will never know 8 billion humans? Where do you draw the line, what is your ideal human population? Would you be content living on an Earth with 14 billion humans and very little wilderness?



posted on May, 19 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Sahabi
 


"And also, if you KNOW the wolves will kill your livestock and it's nearly unavoidable... why not safely leave the wolves an offering of slaughter trimmings, put on the furthest area of your property?"

I am beside myself. Are you that stupid? You put BBQ ribs out on Wednesday.....and you're screaming to 911 on Friday... unbelievable.






top topics



 
129
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join