The wolves need your help

page: 9
129
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   
To the OP, thank you very much for posting this. We rescued an Akita/Wolf mix about a year and a half ago, and he is the best boy I could've asked for. I'm going to have to show this video to my husband, he'll love it. There is a very good Wolfdog sanctuary in the area that houses and cares for many of the animals. And it's not just wolfdog hybrids. Full Moon Farm

I think the biggest problem with the wolf depopulation is simply human ignorance. There is such a misconception of these beautiful animals being ruthless killers, when that is not the case at all.




posted on May, 4 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask




show me the evidence of them ever attacking a human please .



Wolf attacks documented

I was gonna link you the whole thing.........but there wasnt enough room the quote was too big.....



Did you read that article?...Rabbies...Habituation (folks trying to domesticate or get cudly etc.) etc. etc.

Always unusual and limited circumstances...
edit on 4-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)


Uhh did you read the attacks where it was nothing of the sort?

Where the people were just out and about..........hell even the death i linked had NOTHING to do with rabies..

How the hell can you sit here and talk about this subject w out being intellectually honest and ignoring the facts?



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


ahh yes, well in that case

I guess we should erase all history and reports of anything because it MUST be false...

I like how you guys will take sources that are pro wolf from that era, but when it comes to actual documentation that flies in the face of the lies you are spewing , somehow its false....

This debate is futile with you people, you refuse clear facts, in favor of ideals.........and inevitably THAT will be the downfall of the species you are trying to save........because you will do stupid things that will lead to a culling of multitudes of them to SAVE the ecosystem you introduced them to



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by slaine1978
I'm sorry to all the kind wolf/animal/nature loveing people in this thread
for some of my comments.
its just the anti wolf people in the video's and some of the anti wolf people on this thread
are makein me realy realy angry.
this is my last comment in this thread.
i cant listen to there bs anymore.


The only BS coming is from people who refuse to acknowledge the facts THAT I HAVE presented......

You guys have said that they didnt introduce non native species.......I provided proof FROM THE PROGRAMS OWN WRITEUP! that they introduced the non native species.....

You guys said they dont attack humans ever and never have.......
much to my disbelief i couldnt believe the statement was made.........AGAIN i provided proof....

I could go on and on.....

You call US ignorant, but you refuse to acknowledge facts.........we are NOT the ignorant ones.......

THEN you call us Anti Wolf...........none of us said ANYTHING about being anti wolf........infact were PRO conservation of the species.........jsut not NON native species who destroy ecosystems.....

You paint us all with a broad brush, ignore facts........and then call us ignorant......

Funny that



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
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.

We are part of nature for better or worse and that membership affords the opportunity to make decisions that are in keeping with nature or antogonistic toward it. History shows that antogonism toward nature never ends well for the antogonist. Nature alwasy wins....We never "conquered the west" when we headed west. We "survived" it and not without a lot of casualties.

By the way, my views on nature isn't an indictment of hunters...Lions hunt...but to kill for joy or out of ignorance is a mental disease.

"Good hunters"..."Natural hunters" do so because it gets them closer to nature and thier place in it amidst a culture where most folks don't know where their Big Mack originates.

Teddy Roosevelt was a good model of an envirornmentalist and conservationist. He made Yosemite a national park. He also was an avid hunter. Todays culture ways often pit the hunter against the envirornmentalist, but it wasn't always that way. Balance should be the goal and niether fanaticism by envirornmentalists, no calls for extermination of the wolves is the answer. Personally I prefer to let "nature" decide.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

You guys have said that they didnt introduce non native species.......I provided proof FROM THE PROGRAMS OWN WRITEUP! that they introduced the non native species.....


Your definition of "non-native" is lacking in my opinion. Geographically...yes. Genetically no. And historical accounts describe the American wolf as just as large as the Canadian. Wolves don't recognize national borders, if they did the "alien" argument might hold water, but absent that...same genetics, same species, the canadian wolves are the remnants of the same population that lived in Yosemite, Montana aand acroos much of the USA. With a species so adaptable as the wolf, the "non-native" claim fails in every way.


Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
You guys said they dont attack humans ever and never have.......
much to my disbelief i couldnt believe the statement was made.........AGAIN i provided proof....

No...you provided proof of very few rarities that involved unusual circumstances. rabbies, habituation, wolf/dog hybrids etc. and very, very few examples of that. Plus one "tale" from 100 years ago that strains belief.

You base you concerns around size?...Maybe take a read through Teddy Roosevelts accounts of Wolves


The difference even among the wolves of different sections of our own
country is very notable. It may be true that the species as a whole is
rather weaker and less ferocious than the European wolf; but it is
certainly not true of the wolves of certain localities. The great
timber wolf of the central and northern chains of the Rockies and
coast ranges is in every way a more formidable creature than the
buffalo wolf of the plains, although they intergrade. The skins and
skulls of the wolves of north-western Montana and Washington which I
have seen were quite as large and showed quite as stout claws and
teeth as the skins and skulls of Russian and Scandinavian wolves, and
I believe that these great timber wolves are in every way as
formidable as their Old World kinsfolk. However, they live where they
come in contact with a population of rifle-bearing frontier hunters,
who are very different from European peasants or Asiatic tribesmen;
and they have, even when most hungry, a wholesome dread of human
beings.

www.fullbooks.com...

Also this from Teddy, a wilderness authority who lived, studied, hunted and wrote prolifically on the wilderness in a USA at a time when there still was a strong wolf population.



Though, I have never known wolves to attack a man, yet in the wilder
portion of the far Northwest I have heard them come around camp very
close,


Anyone interested should go to the link above and read Teddy Roosevelts chapter on wolves...though be prepared...he hunted them

edit on 4-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


see what i mean.......totally useless debating facts..........


its not just geographically.........the wolves in teh areas were smaller, and less agressive, they kept the canadian greys out which are larger and more agressive...........it was a balance........

Its clear that there is a difference..........look at the sizes of wolves across the world...........and their temperments......

thats like saying its ok to introduce plack panthers, or jaguars into areas in north america because its just a geographical difference.......

Just like some rattle snakes from different parts of the country are more aggressive and grow larger then others.......

Please stop with the ignorance

Not only that, as ive stated before, the native species knew how to HUNT the area they were in and still keep things in balance to stay alive.........

this species is adapted to a totally different ecosystem ............and wreaks havoc on the one it was introduced to......

IE zebra clams up north, snakhead fish in American lakes, the huge tigershrimp now in the gulf.....

STOP WITH THE IGNORANCE
Give me a break
edit on 4-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Indigo5
 


ahh yes, well in that case

I guess we should erase all history and reports of anything because it MUST be false...


Thats a false choice and weak logic. Tales of the Wolf were rampant at that time...they sold papers. All types of tales were told in the papers back then. Doesn't mean all reporting is false..weak, weak argument.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask


its not just geographically.........the wolves in teh areas were smaller, and less agressive, they kept the canadian greys out which are larger and more agressive...........it was a balance........


You obviously didn't read the exhaustive first hand account by Teddy Roosevelt of the wolves in the area? I posted excerpts and a link? Not sure how to discuss it with you if you are unwilling to read my post?



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Indigo5
 


ahh yes, well in that case

I guess we should erase all history and reports of anything because it MUST be false...


Thats a false choice and weak logic. Tales of the Wolf were rampant at that time...they sold papers. All types of tales were told in the papers back then. Doesn't mean all reporting is false..weak, weak argument.


No its not you accuse anything back then of being made up in favor of something and cite it as not being credible...


The same logic can be used with ANYTHING then in history, including the reports YOU cited from the same time that you claim are the TRUTH about numbers back then..........



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

IE zebra clams up north, snakhead fish in American lakes, the huge tigershrimp now in the gulf.....


Creatures from the other end of the globe that have never existed in those waterways. The Canadian wolf is the same animal that ranged that territory. Hint...it doesn't consider itself "Canadian" and doesn't own a passport.


Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

STOP WITH THE IGNORANCE
Give me a break
edit on 4-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)


Yes, please...
edit on 4-5-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 





Creatures from the other end of the globe that have never existed in those waterways. The Canadian wolf is the same animal that ranged that territory. Hint...it doesn't consider itself "Canadian" and doesn't own a passport.


The two wolf species are genetically different......it has NOTHING to do with "country"

Just like other species of animals , on he same continent are different and exhibit different behavioral patterns, sizes, temperments, etc.........ie: some species of bass are more aggressive then others, some sub species of snakes are more aggressive then others, some subspecies of other large animals show better aptitude for reproduction etc etc etc ad nauseum..........

To deny that is pure ignorance..........and a straw man....

Again deal with facts.........not opinion, tho i respect your opinion.........in relation to FACTS it doesnt apply......youre free to have your own opinion , youre not free to change what is FACT
edit on 4-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Indigo5
 


ahh yes, well in that case

I guess we should erase all history and reports of anything because it MUST be false...


Thats a false choice and weak logic. Tales of the Wolf were rampant at that time...they sold papers. All types of tales were told in the papers back then. Doesn't mean all reporting is false..weak, weak argument.


No its not you accuse anything back then of being made up in favor of something and cite it as not being credible...


The same logic can be used with ANYTHING then in history, including the reports YOU cited from the same time that you claim are the TRUTH about numbers back then..........


Go help me...there are newspaper stories about Unicorns from that period...I cited a wilderness text by Teddy effen Roosevelt...If an unsubstantiated newspaper "story" from 100 years ago is your best evidence ..I could care less and there is no helping you think objectively here.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Indigo5
 


ahh yes, well in that case

I guess we should erase all history and reports of anything because it MUST be false...


Thats a false choice and weak logic. Tales of the Wolf were rampant at that time...they sold papers. All types of tales were told in the papers back then. Doesn't mean all reporting is false..weak, weak argument.


No its not you accuse anything back then of being made up in favor of something and cite it as not being credible...


The same logic can be used with ANYTHING then in history, including the reports YOU cited from the same time that you claim are the TRUTH about numbers back then..........


Go help me...there are newspaper stories about Unicorns from that period...I cited a wilderness text by Teddy effen Roosevelt...If an unsubstantiated newspaper "story" from 100 years ago is your best evidence ..I could care less and there is no helping you think objectively here.


It doesnt matter, equating Unicorns to this is the most ridiculous thing ive ever heard of, people report monsters on the news TODAY, so does that mean todays research is invalid too? I can pull up videos of reported unicorns if you like......

Your arguments are weak

And if you are going to use THAT to backup your claim that they arent relevant reports, then it stands to reason that the ones that YOU site from that period are equally and unreliable!

my best evidence is ALL OVER the wikipedia page on the attacks and NUMEROUS sources, try scrolling down and going to them.......

While you are still throwing out "theres no difference between them genetically" and other nonsense that i have refuted, BACKED UP by fact, even by the programs own sources
edit on 4-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Indigo5
 





Creatures from the other end of the globe that have never existed in those waterways. The Canadian wolf is the same animal that ranged that territory. Hint...it doesn't consider itself "Canadian" and doesn't own a passport.


The two wolf species are genetically different......it has NOTHING to do with "country"


The native wolves in Montana are genetically the same as the reintroduced wolves. They are not a sub-species, nor a genetically distinct population.

I can't have a discussion with someone that disregards facts.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Indigo5
 





Creatures from the other end of the globe that have never existed in those waterways. The Canadian wolf is the same animal that ranged that territory. Hint...it doesn't consider itself "Canadian" and doesn't own a passport.


The two wolf species are genetically different......it has NOTHING to do with "country"


The native wolves in Montana are genetically the same as the reintroduced wolves. They are not a sub-species, nor a genetically distinct population.

I can't have a discussion with someone that disregards facts.





Gray wolf (Canis lupus) recovery in the Rocky Mountains of the U.S. is proceeding by both natural recolonization and managed reintroduction. We used DNA microsatellite analysis of wolves transplanted from Canada to two reintroduction sites in the U.S. to study population structure in native and reintroduced wolf populations. Gene flow due to migration between regions in Canada is substantial, and all three recovery populations in the U.S. had high genetic variation.


What was that again?




Some wolves in some areas have learned that livestock can be easy prey. Proactive measures can be taken to help protect livestock (guarding and herding animals, range riders, wolf-targeted fencing, night penning, livestock carcass removal, etc.).
These tools often temporarily succeed in reducing the vulnerability of livestock to wolf depredation, especially when used in combination, but are not usually considered permanent solutions by themselves. Under the draft wolf conservation and management plan, such measures are encouraged with state technical assistance, along with allowances for non-lethal harassment and even lethal control of wolves that cause problems for livestock producers. While wolves are re-establishing in Washington, compensation is available for livestock losses from wolf depredation.

Overall, confirmed wolf depredation on livestock in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming is low compared to losses from other predators like coyotes, weather, and disease, but impacts to individual livestock producers can be significant.


I can do this all day

Ive already proven my point numerous times, backed up by data, and reports from valid sources, again, some of them even from the projects own website.......

I shall take my leave, as it seems the people who think the wolves are "cuddly wuddly" creatures , will totally ignore the facts.........

Again, im all for conservation, im NOT for recklessness by conservationist , who are hypocritical in their statements on human intervention.......
edit on 4-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

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 don't mean we have to play god with animal species populations to be guardians of the earth, either. I think for one that it falls on us not to poison water ( which we are doing ) because we are not the only ones drinking it. Can you disagree with that, truly? The reason that special responsibility falls on us is because we are the only ones that can even understand the concept in the first place.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by fiendchikx138
 


and thank you for taking in the akita/wolf. Would like to give a home to a rescue dog myself but had to send my best mate to the big sleep last year, still to painfull to get another.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Thanks to

Indigo5

jeantherapy

slain1978

ManBehindTheMask

You guys kept this thread alive longer than I expected it to last, and hence was viewed by many more people.

Some good comments on all sides.

I recieved a u2u this morning, wont mention the name but here's what it said.

I will restock them on my land in Texas and Belize.
They are essential to keep the natural order and have been victimized by greed and ignorance. Education is the key for this animal to regain the respect it deserves. A return to a new respect for nature is just around that corner.


Made it all worth while



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
As much as I love all animals I think it's imperative that we don't allow sentiments to be the guiding factor in wildlife management practices. We should leave that to the experts who have spent years in the field studying these animals and their impact on the environment.

People say the ranchers should put up fences, well that is problematic:
A) it's very hard if not impossible to build a wolf-proof fence
B) how do you fence in several thousand acres?

I don't condone the killing of wolves or the attitudes of those portrayed here but they do have a responsibility to protect their livestock and way of earning a living.

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.

Apex predators are critical for sustaining wildlife populations and ensuring the health of all species. Wolves belong here as much as any animal. What needs to be addressed is the losses sustained by people caused by their reintroduction.

If that can be done we can enjoy a relatively peaceful coexistence with all the animals that belong here.
Some beautiful pics and video VoidHawk.
Thanks for sharing!
edit on 6-5-2012 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
129
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join