Call of the wild

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Alex MacDonald, Apr 17, 2013.

  1. Same stance was taken in my home state of MI. Supposedly 5 crossed Lake Superiors ice from Isle Royal ..and that was their new era foot hold.

    Maye it's true / maybe not.. but there can be no argument about the thousands of man hours, State & Federal, that were invested into them [read 'baby-sat'] Doubtfull they'd have ever survived, pro-created, and flourish with out it.
  2. The wolves in Oregon were not reintroduced by design... they arrived here from Idaho... where they were reintroduced by design.

    Wolves have no concept of borders, national or state.
  3. I just got back from 4 days of no bandwidth and found four pages of happy horse-pucky about this. Tim, congratulations, you're my new hero. Damned if you didn't hit the nail on the head with this statement. My sentiments exactly...!
  4. Well, that's a good thing. I am tired of feeding expensive cats to coyotes around here. We have started picking up "lost/found" cats since they are much cheaper.

    I wish the coyotes around my place would eat the cat that shits in my garden and sits on my trucks hood every nite.
  5. In our case, cats are working animals. They are there to eat mice and rats.

    If your problem is a cat that "defecates" in your is good.
  6. I have no problem, just wish that the coyote that I see chaseing field mice and voles would develop a taste for the auto sitting felines in my area
  7. Let's hire the Dog Whisperer to tell the wolves that poachers taste like chicken.
    Alex MacDonald likes this.
  8. Get a paint ball gun. Cats don't like getting hit by them and they hate getting marked by the paint. After you "paint" a couple of them they won't show their face around your place again. Nothing works better on cats than embarrassing them in front of their peers and paint balling cats is a blast.
  9. As a fisheries biologist who works with invasive species, all I have to say is "BINGO!"
    Richard Olmstead likes this.
  10. Northern Pike minnows aka squaw fish in the Columbia are as invasive as wolves in the NW, but the deal with the Pike minnow is they have an unlimited harvest, wolves get special protection from "those who know best". In fact we pay to harvest a native fish because of it's impact on salmon smolt to a fishery A pike minnow, like the wolf is doing what it was designed to, I don't think they have a preference as to what they eat. The difference is one is a nuisance (pike minnow) and one is perceived to enhance the wilderness experience (wolf).

    The issue at hand is there's not one square foot of this country in the lower 48 that doesn't have a modern human imprint, so the theory of keeping wolves here for an enhanced natural experience is a state of mind and what I find asinine. In my opinion, why should a northern pike minnow who is native to the NW be eradicated from it's native water to preserve salmon but a re-introduced wolf eating native game herds that were preserved by several generations of hunters be welcomed? Oxymoron? If you disagree, get out a map and count how many wolf wintering ranges that are paid for by wolf supporters... keep counting.

    Media has as much if not more to do with this situation to shape peoples minds about wolves. Just today there was an article about an 18yr old bull elk in Yellowstone that got killed by a pack of wolves. The biologist or idealist would say, see wolves have no impact on elk because he lived for 18yrs among wolves. The realist would say the only way that bull elk lived that long is because he lived in and around Mammoth Hot Springs where people are present year around. I'll leave that to the biologist here.

    What I do know to be true is 16,500 elk from the Yellowstone herd didn't have the ancesterol gene to defend themselves from the introduction of wolves, perhaps the smart elk moved to Gardiner or Mammoth to take up residence. What I believe is if you feed a tank full of Northern Pike Minnows salmon smolt is they're going to eat and eat good for a short time... then what do they eat?
    ribka likes this.
  11. I just ran into a small pack of wolves in the upper part of the Manastash this past weekend.

    I have brought up the pike minnow/ wolf analogy in the past.
    If it does not individually impact people (non hunting fly fisherman) they do not care.

    Would like to see the reaction if WA WDFW started a pike minnow, cormorant, sea lion stocking program here in the state and started shutting down fisheries to strive for a more natural method of fisheries management.
    Alex MacDonald likes this.
  12. Trustfunder: provide me THE BIOLOGICAL definition of an invasive species, and let's see if wolf fits that definition. This should wrap up the debate rather quickly.

    P.S. Wikipedia doesn't count.

    Aww forget

    Non-native species (aka non-indigenous, foreign, exotic, alien, introduced, transplanted, pest, nuisance) - a species, subspecies, or lower taxon introduced outside its normal geographic distribution; includes any part, gametes, seeds, eggs, or propagule of such species that might survive and subsequently reproduce

    Invasive species - a non-native species whose establishment and spread threaten ecosystems, habitats or species with economic and/or environmental harm
  13. lets see, after reading this info, humans are a invasive species and therefore should be eliminated.. (note to self , need to put this on my things to do list)
  14. Pepper spray paintballs? We used to train with them. Rather unpleasant!
  15. Got it.... Did I say "invasive species"? I don't remember but an animal brought down in a cage from up north, enclosed in a 100 acre pen, fed road kill game and turned loose in a "park/wilderness for the benefit of the people" must be a non-invasive species. While the pike minnow a native species is being slaughtered so a guy can eat a hatchery fed salmon.... your biology makes perfect sense to me.
  16. I'm not understanding this invasive or noninvasive debate. By my way of thinking due to evolution or a shift in migration pattern due to climate change, natural disasters and other shit that happens unexplainible. Would not it be possible for any plant or animal on earth to show up any were else on earth as part of a century old evolation? We know this has happened with people in the last 2,000 or so years.. now wolfs are makeing a comeback I'm hopeing I can adjust to the change .
  17. What a ridiculously stupid statement. Species naturally expand their ranges over a variety of temporal scales, and humans are no exception.

    I get so goddamned sick and tired of people spouting opinions around here as though it were fact (actual fact...not what you've managed to convince yourself of). This thread has been 7 pages of utter nonsense from a bunch of wannabees!! If all you 'know-nothing experts' want to participate in the discussion on any meaningful level, I suggest you pick up a book on invasive species biology and read it to expand your own knowledge base before spouting ridiculous nonsense as though you knew something biologically relevant about the topic! All some of you have done is show how LITTLE you actually understand. Hell, some of you don't even know what qualifies as an invasive species. So ridiculous.
  18. First, it's not MY biology. It's biology. The only biology. I don't know of any other biology. Secondly, I didn't provide a definition that fit some sort of bullshit agenda. The definition is objective. Regardless, you've missed the most important part of the definition, which, frankly, shocks the shit out of me becaause I even highlighted it in red for you!

    Wolves are NOT an invasive species in Washington because the state constitutes a part of its natural historical range. It's just that simple folks...they are not a non-native species to the region. We may have eradicated thaem 100 years ago, but that DOES NOT MATTER. They hhave been RE-introduced, NOT introduced. These differences are not as subtle as they may seem.
  19. "I get so goddamned sick and tired of people spouting opinions around here.."
    Couldn't agree more sir, but its too entertaining and our freedom to do take some liberty in your assault against "wannabees" and "know nothing experts". However, this is what the boys in Philly decided was cool roughly 238 years ago. Its time to accept it.

    Again, as stated earlier, pertaining to wolf re-population; Gray Wolf in comparison to the Canadian "MacKenzie" Wolf is a big swing. Aww heck, google-it for fun.

    There is a reason to make such a decision. Consider budgets and publicly funded projects where the success of said project means permanent funding (employment). -the ratchet-effect of Gov't budgeting should hit home now. Consider this, if one were in charge of such an undertaking, would one recommend placing a species of wolf back into the wild where there is a smaller or larger chance of survival? Any "know nothing expert" would make the choice on the biggest bad-ass wolf one could find. Go big or go home!

    This began as a point of showing how nature should be allowed to run its natural course, if I may Alex. However, this course of action was interrupted by a dumb ass, facilitated by a poor decision, and initiated by a very bad species choice. Seems ridiculously simple to understand.
    ribka likes this.
  20. "This began as a point of showing how nature should be allowed to run its natural course, if I may Alex. However, this course of action was interrupted by a dumb ass, facilitated by a poor decision, and initiated by a very bad species choice. Seems ridiculously simple to understand."

    Works for me, Jersey! I'm viewing this with an historian's perspective, not a biologist's. And historically, no wolves have been zipping around the area for between 163 and 100 years. In anybody but a geologist's book, that's a lot of time. All I'm referring to here is a span of time, and find it strange that people don't want to wrap their minds around a simple concept. That's why i made the comment about dinosaurs. It's simply a matter of (in this case, geologic) time.

    Dick, thanks for the clarification on reproduction of the larger fauna; I was thinking more of the smaller critters when I wrote that and didn't make that clarification. Pretty much, the only cervid which can't take care of itself is the very young, the old, and the injured/weak, so I don't worry much about the population being decimated by wolf predation. What pisses me off is the idea that a very small but very vocal minority can convince some government idiot that screwing around with the ecosystem is a good idea. Remember when the legislator from eastern WA wanted to float a bill to relocate wolves into more urban areas to "share our good fortune" with people on, say Vashon? What an outcry of NIMBY that produced! If it's good for the goose, it ought to be good for the gander, but that seems not to be the way it works, does it!

Share This Page