This really erked me so I had to post it to see how some of you felt. What a total liberal BS point of view. This is what the media is doing to ruin us as conservationists. Total lies, lies and half truths and certainly not the whole story

If you notice, the narrator makes no mention of the literal extinction of the moose population

http://theunboundedspirit.com/...olves-change-rivers/

As long as game isn't available for human hunters its ok.

Unfortunately, even though the presentation is overly dramatic, there is a good bit of truth in some of what is stated but there is not enough actual/factual information presented.

In my opinion, the biggest problem with the whole wolf reintroduction program revolves around the heavy handed manner USF&WS carried it out.

Had they involved just the states involved and the citizens of those states, and after formulating a plan proceeded slowly with continual monitoring by both state and federal wildlife management personnel. They did not do that, they introduced too many animals too quickly and they paid too much attention to the wrong segment of the population, people with little or no actual knowledge of the role of predators in a reasonably health ecosystem.

Before the wolf reintroductions started however, concern had been raised about the effect elk numbers were having on the habitat in Yellowstone NP. Many of the things touched on in the film clip were being discussed well before the wolf program got off drawing board. Soil erosion was definitely an issue and there was a direct correlation between that erosion and the high numbers of elk in the park and their effect thru grazing/browsing, which includes the effect the hooves of that many animals of that size have on the soil.

Deer and moose numbers had been declining simply because neither can effectively compete with elk. Once the elk ate down their preferred foods they moved on to what was available, such as willows, which is a food source for moose and beaver.

There were other options that could have been used to reduce elk numbers in Yellowstone, USF&WS decided to go with wolves but simply did not put the monitoring that was needed in place..

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Unfortunately, even though the presentation is overly dramatic, there is a good bit of truth in some of what is stated but there is not enough actual/factual information presented.

In my opinion, the biggest problem with the whole wolf reintroduction program revolves around the heavy handed manner USF&WS carried it out.

Had they involved just the states involved and the citizens of those states, and after formulating a plan proceeded slowly with continual monitoring by both state and federal wildlife management personnel. They did not do that, they introduced too many animals too quickly and they paid too much attention to the wrong segment of the population, people with little or no actual knowledge of the role of predators in a reasonably health ecosystem.

Before the wolf reintroductions started however, concern had been raised about the effect elk numbers were having on the habitat in Yellowstone NP. Many of the things touched on in the film clip were being discussed well before the wolf program got off drawing board. Soil erosion was definitely an issue and there was a direct correlation between that erosion and the high numbers of elk in the park and their effect thru grazing/browsing, which includes the effect the hooves of that many animals of that size have on the soil.

Deer and moose numbers had been declining simply because neither can effectively compete with elk. Once the elk ate down their preferred foods they moved on to what was available, such as willows, which is a food source for moose and beaver.

There were other options that could have been used to reduce elk numbers in Yellowstone, USF&WS decided to go with wolves but simply did not put the monitoring that was needed in place..

Crazy - you don't live in Wyoming - I did. There is nothing truthful about the video
Prior to the introduction of the Canadian Wolves, there was a viable population of native wolves "Timber Wolves" That population is now extinct because the larger Canadian Wolves not only killed the coyotes as indicated in the video, they also exterminate all other forms of competition, including the timber wolves and the fox, that the video so predominantly pointed out as a rising population, taking advantage of the wolf kills. totally a lie. You want to know why I believe this? I had a high school friend named Kirk Inberg, who went to college and got his biologist degree. He majored in grizzly bear and wolf management. He went to work for WYO F&G. One of his jobs was to go into the Yellowstone ecosystem and count animals. I went with him several times. We SAW wolves. Obviously this was prior to the introduction of the Canadian wolves. Unfortunately Kirk was killed in a light aircraft wreck while working for the fish and game department of Wyoming. You can Google that. Let me explain the difference in the two wolves, as you probably have not had access to compare the two animals. Timber Wolves are "Pair Animals" In other words they generally live in a male/female relationship, have a litter of pups and when those pups are big enough to fend for themselves, the parents abandon them. Very similar to the coyote lifestyle. They are around 80 to 120 pounds. The Canadian wolves are "Pack Animals" they have a dominate male and female, and the family group stays together, making "Packs" of wolves. These animals can weigh in excess of 150 lbs. and can get larger based upon the availability of food supplies. "Packs" of wolves can take down much larger prey than two wolves, thereby the reason the moose, elk, bear, deer, mountain lion etc. are being exterminated in the country that the pack wolves gain dominance in. I took my family to Yellowstone several years ago so they could see the beauty and the animals that I grew up with. To say we did not see much is an understatement. No elk, no deer, no moose, no coyotes, no fox, no black bear. The only animals we saw were Bison and Wolves. The wolves have become so bold - possibly because of hunger because everything else is dead, that you can see them wandering around parking lots looking for trash to eat.
When I was a kid fishing in Yellowstone it was common to see a couple coyotes and a fox or two. I challenge you to find one there now. Black Bears were common, and driving the roads you would see several a day. Even the black bear and Mountain Lion populations have suffered tremendously because of the introduced feral canadian wolf. Survival rate among black bear cubs is the lowest ever documented in the history of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The mortality rate of moose calves is .25, in other words 1 out of 400 moose calves born lives the first year. Obviously that is not a sustainable rate for the survival of moose. I could go on about elk and deer and the impact the wolves have had on their existence, but it follows in line with moose so whats the point. The only animals holding ground is the Bison and the Grizzly. Yellowstone, once one of the few areas left in the world where animals were in numbers to be readily visible for people to see, is now almost devoid of anything except apex animals.
Your comment about Elk eating the preferred food of the deer and moose is simply in factual. Elk are grazers. Deer are Browsers. Moose are browsers also, however they browse different plants than deer. None of them compete for the same food source.
The Yellowstone fire in the late 80's opened up thousands of acres of additional feeding areas for primarily deer, elk and bison by burning down the heavy timber and the lay down timber, clearing space for buffalo grass to sprout and sage brush to grow, fertilizing the ground and providing 100 times more food source for deer and elk than what was there prior to the fire. For anyone to say that the animals were running out of food is simply someone who does not know the truth and facts
As far as soil erosion caused by "hoofs" I don't believe that for a minute. Erosion in this type of country is a constant re-birth created by snow pack and spring run off. You can tell by the video that they "picked' certain times of the year to show the erosion effects and blaming it on the ungulate population
In short, this video does not have one actual truth. And when people view it and come up with the synopsis that the video aims at, such as your opinion after viewing it, that is the intent of the marketing of the video
Once again, total lies, half lies - no truth

The liberal media will always pick what they want to show. They do it in such a manner that it only helps their agenda and BS tall tales. Who in the hell do they think they're foolin' ! Obviously a lot of people buy into that crap they spew. Sad!

Full Roar, Thanks for that post. Its a world away from me but non the less very informative and a f***** sad reflection on those responsible. jc

Full Roar, you have your opinion, have the manners and intelligence to allow others to have theirs. I am not defending that video or the message they are trying to get across.

Just because someone hasn't lived some where, it does not mean that they are stupid.

USF&WS could have reduced elk numbers in the Yellowstone by running controlled hunts to bring overall numbers of elk back in line with what the habitat was capable of supporting.

I don't believe the wolves should have been introduced into the area in the first place. Hopefully, between Wyoming/Montana and Idaho, those states Game & Fish departments can keep having open seasons on wolves and manage them the same as any other species of wildlife.

Instead of getting all self righteous and indignant, you might want to take the time to figure out who actually agrees with you, even though they do not express themselves in the exact same manner as you do!

Listening to that made me laugh as the guy talks about an entire ecosystem changing for the good in less than 20 years because of the wolf introduction which is impossible and pure BS in that short length of time!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Full Roar, you have your opinion, have the manners and intelligence to allow others to have theirs. I am not defending that video or the message they are trying to get across.

Just because someone hasn't lived some where, it does not mean that they are stupid.

USF&WS could have reduced elk numbers in the Yellowstone by running controlled hunts to bring overall numbers of elk back in line with what the habitat was capable of supporting.

I don't believe the wolves should have been introduced into the area in the first place. Hopefully, between Wyoming/Montana and Idaho, those states Game & Fish departments can keep having open seasons on wolves and manage them the same as any other species of wildlife.

Instead of getting all self righteous and indignant, you might want to take the time to figure out who actually agrees with you, even though they do not express themselves in the exact same manner as you do!

No intention was made or inferred that you were stupid or not entitled to your opinion. As far as self righteous and indignant you should look into the mirror. I am simply trying to inform the un-informed, such as yourself.
What I was trying to get across is your statement that the elk numbers were out of control. Having lived there, seen the elk numbers at the time, hunted the elk prior to Canadian wolf introduction, visited Yellowstone possibly more than anyone you have ever met, I can tell you unequivocally that you are wrong. There was not a overpopulation problem with the elk in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem prior to the fires of the late 80's and certainly not after the fires. Please re-read my statement about the park being able to support many more animals due to the fire (a natural occurrence that was un-naturally managed by the government until mother nature said enough)I would also like to add that I and my father were some of the volunteer fire fighters for that fire, helping to save West Yellowstone

And also please re-read my statement about the actual wolf itself. It was not the same wolf as historically inhabited the area, such as a collie is not the same dog as a German Shepherd. The historical wolf in the area is now extinct. Do they tell the rest of the bunny huggers that little bit of truth and tragedy?
And no, you do not know what the real situation was and is, because you do not and have not lived there. There is no way you can have the true informed knowledge without having done so. You can only have an opinion. This is easily demonstrated by your lack of knowledge of different types of wolves. You are lumping them all into the same category. I put myself in the same category as you living in Texas. I have passed thru Olney, but don't live there. No possible way I can be as informed about Olney as you are. Your comment about a lot of truth in the video tells me you don't have any on the ground experience's in Yellowstone. There is no truth in that video and that is what I am trying to get you to understand from a guy who was there, not speculation or opinion from a distance. If you quit getting your panties tied up around your neck every time some one tries to give you the truth that overrides your opinion, maybe you would understand some things better. I cant help you if you don't listen

There is absolutely not one good thing that has come of these wolf introductions. Our ancestors here in the West, knew what they were doing.

The last wolves in my area were killed in the 20's. Unfortunately, they are returning.

I've thought about the lib agenda in regards to so called "conservation". It has nothing to do, whatsoever, with the preservation of wildlife.

Roar:

I enjoyed your comments.

Again, I am not uninformed, well before the idea of introducing wolves to that region, talks had been going on among biologists, both state and federal about elk numbers.

Like any/every other species of wild hoof stock or wild animal of any species for that matter, once an animal eats all of its preferred food stuffs, it will start eating whatever is available.

Once the elk grazed down everything they could, they started browsing on what green vegetation was available.

I may have only been to Yellowstone one time, but I have been working with or around hoof stock both wild and domestic long enough to know that once a food supply is exhausted, it does not matter what they prefer to eat, the will eat whatever is readily available.

As far as the effect of hooves on soil, all a person has to do is look at the history of buffalo in the west. They moved thru an area, grazed down all the available vegetation and their hooves broke up the top soil. During periods of normal rainfall the rain would simply soak in easier.

During periods of heavier rainfall however, the loose soil, especially on slopes would wash away with the water once it got to moving, that is erosion.

I respect you for your opinion, no problem, I simply do not completely agree with it and I do not believe that you are the ultimate authority on all things concerning wildlife management.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:
Listening to that made me laugh as the guy talks about an entire ecosystem changing for the good in less than 20 years because of the wolf introduction which is impossible and pure BS in that short length of time!

My thought exactly.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Again, I am not uninformed, well before the idea of introducing wolves to that region, talks had been going on among biologists, both state and federal about elk numbers.I lived there and never heard of these "discussions" I'm stating a fact. the Elk were not overpoplsted anywhere

Like any/every other species of wild hoof stock or wild animal of any species for that matter, once an animal eats all of its preferred food stuffs, it will start eating whatever is available.

Once the elk grazed down everything they could, they started browsing on what green vegetation was available.Once again, you did not read what I wrote. You blindly stick to your "opinion" The park had more than enough grazing and browsing vegetation to support more than three times the amount of ungulates living there

I may have only been to Yellowstone one time,Which means you know squat about the habitat, the animals, the winters and the effect of the winters. Winter kill plays a huge part in controlling elk, deer and moose populations. We did not need wolves to assist but I have been working with or around hoof stock both wild and domestic long enough to know that once a food supply is exhausted, it does not matter what they prefer to eat, the will eat whatever is readily available.The food supply was never in question. wait, did I just repeat myself?Possibly you should READ what I WROTE

As far as the effect of hooves on soil, all a person has to do is look at the history of buffalo in the west. They moved thru an area, grazed down all the available vegetation and their hooves broke up the top soil. During periods of normal rainfall the rain would simply soak in easier.

During periods of heavier rainfall however, the loose soil, especially on slopes would wash away with the water once it got to moving, that is erosion.yes. And it happens every year where you get the snowfall that the Yellowstone's get. The elk don't cause it anymore than the wolves do

I respect you for your opinion, no problem, I simply do not completely agree with it and I do not believe that you are the ultimate authority on all things concerning wildlife management.

never claimed to be the ultimate authority, just know a hell of a lot more about the area than you do

Crazy - no pun intended. but you really need to listen to some one who has experience rather than someone who has an opinion. I present "Facts" based upon "Experience"
you offer "opinion" based upon ?????

My opinion is based on having an open mind and reading information that was being presented by field biologists working in the park prior to the wolf introductions.

You can not open your mind enough to understand that I agree with you and others that introducing the wolves was a bad idea from the start as there were wolves already in the area.

One of the deciding factors for the introductions was most likely as someone else stated, take game away from licensed hunters. Introducing the wolves was the fastest way to accomplish that. They definitely were not going to allow hunters under special permits reduce the numbers.

You seem to have the inability to understand that other people, regardless of where they are from, have a working knowledge of wildlife management.

You also seem to have a difficult time understanding that other people also believe the whole wolf introduction/reintroduction program should never have taken place.

By all means, do your best to alienate people that have the same basic attitude as you on this issue, simply because they view things from a slightly different angle.

Those not willing to listen will never learn. Those unwilling to learn can never be taught

have a nice life down there in Olney Crazy

Not sure what you believe I need to learn. I can look at the situation objectively for the most part, something you seem to be totally unable to do.

It really does not matter what is in that video or how it is presented, the FACT remains for anyone with any understanding of nature and wildlife management, the introduction of wolves into that area was wrong on several levels.

and POOF!
I did the little ignore thingy and the dumb ass's comments disappeared. KOOL!

Only critter I finally heard enough BS from and put on ignore

To bad his "open mind" is closed up like Hillary Clintons Vagina. Maybe he could actually learn a few things from people with worldly experience on this site rather than keeping his head stuck into his own pig hole down there in "Olnay Texass"
The mans a philosophical nightmare

quote:

Originally posted by Full Roar:
and POOF!
I did the little ignore thingy and the dumb ass's comments disappeared. KOOL!

Only critter I finally heard enough BS from and put on ignore

To bad his "open mind" is closed up like Hillary Clintons Vagina. Maybe he could actually learn a few things from people with worldly experience on this site rather than keeping his head stuck into his own pig hole down there in "Olnay Texass"
The mans a philosophical nightmare

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:

quote:

Originally posted by Full Roar:
and POOF!
I did the little ignore thingy and the dumb ass's comments disappeared. KOOL!

Only critter I finally heard enough BS from and put on ignore

To bad his "open mind" is closed up like Hillary Clintons Vagina. Maybe he could actually learn a few things from people with worldly experience on this site rather than keeping his head stuck into his own pig hole down there in "Olnay Texass"
The mans a philosophical nightmare

Only reason I haven't put him on ignore is that I can come to this site for a good laugh and usually get one if CHC makes a post!

Gee full roar, you must spend a lot of time over at the fire. Your vulgar, personal attacks in the place of valid arguments seem to indicate that.
And you can do your little "poof" magic with me if you'd like.
My post has nothing to do with wolves.

I issued no vulgar or personal attacks, not sure what got your panties in a bunch wasbeeman, don't know you, never chatted with you
no hard feelings towards you

have a wonderful life

quote:

Originally posted by Full Roar:
To bad his "open mind" is closed up like Hillary Clintons Vagina. Maybe he could actually learn a few things from people with worldly experience on this site rather than keeping his head stuck into his own pig hole down there in "Olnay Texass"
The mans a philosophical nightmare

I guess this was not a vulgar personal attack?

We can disagree on a lot of stuff but it is worth remembering that we agree on the important stuff.

Putting CHC on ignore is silly.

One of the reasons why the various non-hunting/anti-hunting forces around the world are gaining ground and will continue to do so.

As a group hunters seem to be eternally bent on being unwilling to focus on the points they agree on while at the same time concentrating on the minutia over differences in semantics and thoughts/views on minor points.

I could be totally wrong on this, but, the entire wolf introduction/reintroduction was wrong on multiple levels.

As far as the video clip is concerned whether a person/anyone believes it is a total lie/contains some factual content or believes in it completely, that is their prerogative, as long as they understand that the wolf program as it was implemented, produced more negative aspects than positive, and because of that things may never be get straightened out in that region.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
One of the reasons why the various non-hunting/anti-hunting forces around the world are gaining ground and will continue to do so.

As a group hunters seem to be eternally bent on being unwilling to focus on the points they agree on while at the same time concentrating on the minutia over differences in semantics and thoughts/views on minor points.

I could be totally wrong on this, but, the entire wolf introduction/reintroduction was wrong on multiple levels.

As far as the video clip is concerned whether a person/anyone believes it is a total lie/contains some factual content or believes in it completely, that is their prerogative, as long as they understand that the wolf program as it was implemented, produced more negative aspects than positive, and because of that things may never be get straightened out in that region.

***This is where CHC is totally wrong and why Full Roar was correct, even if he got a little carried away in his retorts to and about CHC. CHC many times states his opinion on things with absolutely no facts to back himself up and this thread was a good example. An opinion evidently does not need to be backed up by fact in his mind to be correct and that is BS if you are on a Forum in a debate on a particular subject and trying to prove you are right. Now he has come back and made another post that makes no sense because those who view the video and don't know the facts will think the wolf introduction was the greatest thing since sliced bread, while hunters and people who actually understand what has happened know the true facts, as Full Roar presented them so well. CHC lost the whole reason that video was made in that it was to do exactly the opposite and show positive aspects of the introduction than what his final statement says people should know! Most viewers should realize that an ecosystem isn't changed substantially in just 20 years time. However, the uniformed will not and will certainly say the film was correct because of the way it was slickly slanted for the viewer to come up with that conclusion!

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
One of the reasons why the various non-hunting/anti-hunting forces around the world are gaining ground and will continue to do so.

As a group hunters seem to be eternally bent on being unwilling to focus on the points they agree on while at the same time concentrating on the minutia over differences in semantics and thoughts/views on minor points.

I could be totally wrong on this, but, the entire wolf introduction/reintroduction was wrong on multiple levels.

As far as the video clip is concerned whether a person/anyone believes it is a total lie/contains some factual content or believes in it completely, that is their prerogative, as long as they understand that the wolf program as it was implemented, produced more negative aspects than positive, and because of that things may never be get straightened out in that region.

***This is where CHC is totally wrong and why Full Roar was correct, even if he got a little carried away in his retorts to and about CHC. CHC many time states his opinion on things with absolutely no facts to back himself up and this thread was a good example. An opinion evidentally does not need to be backed up by fact in his mind to be correct and that is BS if you are on a Forum in a debate on a particular subject and trying to prove you are right. Now he has come back and made another post that makes no sense because those who view the video and don't know the facts will think the wolf introduction was the greatest thing since sliced bread, while hunters and people who actually understand what has happened know the true facts, as Full Roar presented them so well. CHC lost the whole reason that video was made in that it was to do exactly the opposite and show positive aspects of the introduction than what his final statement says people should know! Most viewers should realize that an ecosystem isn't changed substantially in just 20 years time. However, the uniformed will not and will certainly say the film was correct because of the way it was slickly slanted for the viewer to come up with that conclusion!

Exactly why I have decided to just ignore crazy, you simply cannot present any facts to him and have him adjust his mind set. Not just me, but no one. To frustrating to try to inform him and have him contemplate and change his position. For a bit of background into this look at his comments when he posted about Greg Rodriquez getting shot. That was the most disgusting thing I have ever read here on AR

To confirm:
yes, I understand Crazy believes the wolf introduction to be a bad thing altogether
No, he does not get it that a indigenous population of wolves was eradicated and that wolf sub-species exist
No, he does not get it that I was there along with a biologist studying the bear and wolf population at the time and no whereas I speak. To elaborate he provides that he retains his opinion based upon biologists reports. I was there with a biologist, making those reports
No, he does not get it that the elk had nothing to do with erosion of the river banks. As I started, in heavy snow country like the Yellowstone's, winter dictates erosion. In other words Mother Nature decides, which is the way it is supposed to be. If any animal in the system provides any impact on erosion it is the human population
No, he does not get it that there was no shortage of a food supply for the animals in the park. As I stated the fire storm in the 80's prior to the feral wolf introduction opened up 250,000 acres of additional feeding area
No, he does not get it that the elk have not been nearly or as severely impacted as the other deer species, the moose in particular. Elk have the ability to escape better than deer or moose. Deer are to small and weak to escape or fight back, moose are to stupid to run or hide. Bison are just to big and tough and willing to fight for the wolves to have much of an impact on. Crazy tries to consistently hammer his opinion that the elk were overpopulated and creating erosion. Totally unfounded. The smooth talking narrator in the video must have gotten to him

I could go on but there is no point to it.

You cannot present facts to the man and change his opinion he garnered from perusing thru a readers digest 40 years ago. You cannot point out that he may be wrong with one of his "opinions" and have him accept that he might be wrong. He staunchly hangs onto his position regardless of facts that are presented to him. Such is his choice, Unfortunate, as there are a lot of guys on here with experience with a much bigger part of this world that he could gain some intelligence from IF he would only listen and learn. To date, I cannot see where he has ever admitted he might be incorrect. My opinion is he lives a much mundane life, so to get a little attention he posts his controversial opinions to get a rise out of people
He is a conundrum, and I personally am at the point where I don't want to read anymore of his contentious, nonsensical and quite frankly ignorant remarks and opinions
I am quite content with having him on ignore, having grown past the point of amusement from his silliness
Sad state of affairs for crazy when someone puts him on ignore before shootaway or zombie killer. I am sure I am not the first to do so

As far as a couple of you guys not liking my zealousness or attitude, I don't mean any disrespect and apologize for any feelings I might have hurt.

Rory

Full Roar---I forgot about the Greg Rodriguez debacle involving CHC, but it was truly the worst I've read until possibly the absolutely despicable remarks by ZK the other day regarding that beautiful wife of a member that's fighting for her life! Those two dumb SOBs ought to be locked up in the same cell with each other and we wouldn't even have to think about using an ignore feature on this site! CHC has proved so dumb that when he finally put me on ignore he now comes back and posts shit against me after I post something that actually agrees with his viewpoint like I just did regarding the ongoing Maine bear thread, LOL!

TG-we cant save them all
Lets focus on the ones that can learn from each other and share experience's with- without the poo throwing that comes with guys like crazy and ZK

I personally am gratified to be able to listen to guys like yourself, MJines, Todd, Frostbit, Mac, Double Don, Scriptus, surestrike and a host of others that are fun to talk to and know what they speak of, and don't mind having a little good natured fun in the meantime. For instance, I've learned more about double rifles on this forum than I could have any where else, in addition to meeting guys like Double Don, RIP, Larry Shores, and others, guys who really know what they are talking about and have been there and done that. This site is tremendous if you take advantage of it and open up your mind and eliminate your preconceived notions and look past the guys like crazy. No better information comes from anywhere other than those that have done it, and I don't care what books or articles you have read
Like my dad used to say "you wont make that mistake twice" Reading an article does not present that risk

thanks for the support

have a good day brother

Rory

Thanks Rory and you have a good one too---MIKE