Mind Games!

Meh.

Wolves encroaching on human lands. It's near impossible not too except for reserved or isolated spaces.

Go look at some random google maps, our footprint is like a cancer on this planet, it's just how WE roll... Everywhere!

a reply to: RAY1990

Would you rather it be the other way around?

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

No I'd prefer less extremes on both sides of the argument.

I've been attacked by a dog before, I don't want them all dead. The opposite actually. I also fully understand that often conflict cannot exist if you remove yourself from the situation.

I've been attacked by humans too, even in my own home. It's not hard to avoid conflict but all animals are dangerous when cornered, desperate and/or starving.

I live in the UK, we have no wolves and I couldn't wish them back either. In terms of human occupation we're at stage 5... It wouldn't end well.

a reply to: RAY1990

I've been attacked by a dog before, I don't want them all dead.

With all due respect, being attacked by a dog is nothing like being attacked by a wolf. Dogs are domesticated... even feral dogs still have some of that domestication in them. Wolves have none. Wolves are also much larger than dogs (unless you're talking about an Akita or Great Dane). I'll kill an attacking dog in a New York heartbeat.

As for humans being the same, yes, in many ways we are. That's irrelevant. Nature doesn't care about fairness or equality or compassion. Those are human traits. Nature says the strongest will survive. Nature says all others will die. So on this mountain, I am the top of the food chain!

I don't live on an island devoid of large predators. I live in an area that is largely unclaimed wilderness. By choice. Mother Nature and I are old friends, and we understand each other. We occasionally hear the odd mountain lion in the distance; they so far have left us alone and we let them be. If they ever do not... they'll die. Immediately. No compassion, no legal research... if I see a mountain lion, I will kill it on sight. The same with wild boar. They exist maybe 20 miles from me. If I see one, I kill it. Period.

Recently we have been hearing a pack of coyotes. I keep a gun loaded and by the door. If I see one, I will kill it, without remorse, without care, without emotion of any kind. It will have threatened me by its very existence. That's nature: this is my territory and I will defend it from the critters who I know will harm it or me. As the OP said, a wolf is like a coyote times 20, so guess what I'll do to a wolf?

Law be damned, and environmentalists be damned. I will protect my territory.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Trucker1

He killed a bear with a POCKET knife? Why does this story make me think of fisherman tall tales? 😂

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

And...we'll keep on killing every single one of those demonic vermin we see!! And, we won't stop until they're all gone...again! Forever!!!! Wolves have no place in our world.

Just like wild cats...they don't belong.

Well, I'm not sure they are evil or demonic. They're just animals, right? Just doing what animals do to survive. I'm not arguing about whether or not they should be "allowed" to live in their natural environment, just wondering why you are giving them human characteristics.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Okay, "demonic" was maybe a little over the top. Perhaps I should have used the word "calculating" and "without remorse", or "devoid of emotion".

People often ask me, as a hunter, if I would ever go to Africa to hunt. My answer has always been a steadfast "You bet I would!!" And they usually get all up in arms and upset about it, asking how I could ever hunt those 'innocent' and 'majestic' animals. And again, my answer is always the same. I have no desire to take a water buffalo, or a lion, or a giraffe. I have no desire to take a trophy. Never have really. No, I'd want to go to Africa to hunt one thing, and one thing only. Hyenas. You'd be surprised how many people suddenly change their tune and just don't know how to respond to that one.

In many ways, the tactics of the wolf and the tactics of hyenas are very similar. And while they aren't even really related, their methods are the same / similar. So my feelings of ill are shared between the species.

I would bet grey wolves [that's been reintroduced to the environment] to be more hostile, as they would have to adapt, relearn to hunt and claim territory etc.

I have no problems living with wolves, though the wolves we have are red wolves and they've always been here....

A red wolf I believe is smarter than a grey wolf, they tend to keep their distance from humans, so much that researches think they're a rare species... plus they look similar to coyotes except a bit larger.

Last month I caught a red wolf near my deer feeder.

a reply to: KansasGirl

He kept his knife razor sharp. It would not have been possible without the pocket knife nor would he have had time to get it out of his pocket and would likely never have been able to cut the bear without distracting it with his hat . Every part of it was very fortunate and is a true story.

He was strong enough to have probably beat the bear to death. Another man in that area is credited for doing that.

a reply to: TheRedneck

With all due respect, being attacked by a dog is nothing like being attacked by a wolf. Dogs are domesticated... even feral dogs still have some of that domestication in them. Wolves have none. Wolves are also much larger than dogs (unless you're talking about an Akita or Great Dane). I'll kill an attacking dog in a New York heartbeat. 

I probably didn't express my point well enough, maybe should've used snakes or spiders that will kill you given the chance. My point was conflict with "wants vs needs" in mind.

The man is on about destroying every wolf everywhere.

As for humans being the same, yes, in many ways we are. That's irrelevant. Nature doesn't care about fairness or equality or compassion. Those are human traits. Nature says the strongest will survive. Nature says all others will die. So on this mountain, I am the top of the food chain!

The nature of nature isn't all that chaotic, I know that you're much wiser than me when it comes to this. Animals usually only do do stupid things when they are injured, stressed or starving. As long as we don't do stupid things we can somewhat live together.

All in all I actually agree with you, if I lived in the countryside I'd kill any and all pests on my land, within reason. Especially threats to my being, carnivorous animals. Nature is territorial.

But in this country that's not how it's worked to date. We actively organised hunts for the likes of wolves, we occupied everywhere feasible. In the long run wolves didn't stand a chance along with countless other species of animal and even fauna to boot. We're destructive like that. We'll drain swamp lands, annihilate forests etc. When it comes to wildlife we'll trap em, kill em on site and actively hunt them when they're vulnerable. That isn't defensive strategies, we brought a whole different ball game to this planet.

Anyways my point is the encroachment, some conflict is unavoidable sure but at the same time most of us don't live in wilderness, we never have historically either. Fact is we tame the land then dominate it, sometimes it gets out of hand and we do some artificial conservation. We do it from the perspective of our ideal world.

I wasn't joking about humans being like cancer, it's a rarity to be more than 100 miles from another human. That's my point, it will always be my point. That's why elephants are being wiped out in Asia, they're migratory and on their travels often come into conflict with humans, thus stress. Humans try to kill them and thus elephants evolve to be "evil" to humans.

We're the problem. Difference is we have the intelligence to change this and the resources too. Animals are just trying to survive.

But who cares right? This is a human world. Just a shame it's becoming a lonely and barren one.

a reply to: RAY1990

I probably didn't express my point well enough, maybe should've used snakes or spiders that will kill you given the chance. My point was conflict with "wants vs needs" in mind.

Hahaha, no, using a dog was a better choice. I simply step on spiders, and I consider snake meat delicious.

I was actually bitten twice by a brown recluse spider about 20 years ago. I killed it and felt kinda sick afterwards so I went home, laid down, ran my fever, and was fine a few hours later. The second bite went away; the first one left a hole in my back, which eventually scabbed over and I still have to this day. Every now and then it itches. But even that was nothing like being attacked by a dog.

And a dog attack is nothing like being attacked by a pack of wolves. That was my point.

Animals usually only do do stupid things when they are injured, stressed or starving. As long as we don't do stupid things we can somewhat live together.

True enough, but with a caveat. Animals do not care what we want or need. By their very nature, wild animals are concerned only about one thing: themselves. Man has developed this compassion that actually tends to threaten us when dealing with nature.

To a wolf, there are three classifications of other creatures: prey, to be eaten whenever one is hungry; competition, which includes any other creature that may eat one's future prey; and pack members, who one must work with to survive. That's it. There's no other classification to a wolf. Competition (like us) is to be destroyed whenever possible, and pack members will be spared as long as they are useful. That's not 'stupid things' to the wolf; it's just what they do to survive.

The real issue is the environmentalists who refuse to accept that animals are animals. A lone wolf is a threat because he is likely not alone; there's a pack around close. A wild boar is a threat because even though it's a pig and pretty intelligent as animals go, it has no fear of humans and will gladly eat a few for breakfast (and they like to pack as well). A deer is a threat because if not controlled, it and its kin will destroy crops.

On the other hand, humans have shown a tendency to go overboard. That deer will destroy crops, yes, but only if allowed to populate itself too fast. Hunting fixes that problem and maintains some deer to carry on the species. That's a great compromise. Wolves in remote areas where there are few humans and no real farming (yes there are such areas) are no threat to humans; as soon as they come near humans, though, they must be destroyed. My philosophy on this is that people have every right to ensure their safety and prosperity over animals, but there is also no need to go after those animals which are, for one reason or another, not a threat. There is a difference between self-defense and vengeance.

I go by the adage: live and let live, or intrude on me and die. It seems to work well out here. I still have some squirrels even... if the population is low enough, they eat the acorns and leave (most of) my nuts alone. No reason to exterminate them all, especially since more would just move in from elsewhere).

And animals are beautiful... well, except for possums and armadillos.

TheRedneck

Fcuk it lets just kill all the animals big cats, gators, hippos, sting rays, all the animals that have killed a human, it's only fair...

Of course I'm kidding, you were out in the wild, you should be prepared for predators, humans are the most dangerous, also wolves can't even open truck doors, ur trigger finger itchy.