Please vote.

http://www.khq.com/Global/stor...S=10854674#poll86082

Just voted, it is 49/yes
51/No

ddj

I have no problem turning loose thousands of them in Washington, D.C.

If they admit to two Packs ,in reality there is probably a couple hundred.

The truth is that they are already there, the knitwits all think we have stupid wrote on our foreheads. Here in montana by me there are 2 females that calved out one litter of 12 and the other is 9 but they tell you that they only have 1 or 2 max...Hey stupid--they are dogs and come in heet twice a year.!!!!!!!!!!!!!Go luck with your wolves, Hopefully that judge will rule for the wildlife and not the out of state interests,thats a dream,

www.african-montana-taxidermy.com

73 yes 27 no. not cool.

It's still 73% yes and 27% no. There goes the hunting in Washington, glad we don't have that problem in Texas.
Rodney.

Only on the incorporated land of the city of Seattle.

As an Albertan we would be glad to transfer wolves in the same way that Wyoming chose to reintroduce the wolf. All the granola people will rejoice. Within a decade you may notice some reduction in your ungulate population. You will then notice a decrease in hunting opportunity. The granola people will again rejoice. YOU DO NOT WANT THEM!!

Yeah Rodney! I'm bringing two pregnant females with me next month in the trunk of the car.

Rich
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by bwest:
As an Albertan we would be glad to transfer wolves in the same way that Wyoming chose to reintroduce the wolf. All the granola people will rejoice. Within a decade you may notice some reduction in your ungulate population. You will then notice a decrease in hunting opportunity. The granola people will again rejoice. YOU DO NOT WANT THEM!!

Only one mistake with your statement, the people of Wyoming, never did and still don't want the friggin things-it was the people from Washington DC who wanted them as pets, to be kept in WY.

quote:

Originally posted by analog_peninsula:
Only on the incorporated land of the city of Seattle.

+1.

I voted agian.

Still 71/29

I erased my history. Maybe we could vote multiple times.

ddj

we have lots of wolves here in Minnesota. And I am glad they are here. Yes, they eat a lot of deer. and yes, they eat a lot of Moose.

But so do we.

Sorry to disagree with you 22WRF. Wolves never have left Minnesota and are apart of the Northern Boreal Forest Ecosystem. They should be in Minnesota. They are no longer apart of the Northern Rocky Ecosystem and shouldn't have been reintroduced. Or at the very least not reintoduced until a plan was set for a carrying capacity and a way to remove excess populations.

Reintroducing wolves was careless, thoughtless, and a misuse of resources.

ddj

The State of Washington needs to be split in half into two separate states.
Let the Seattle side go about their merry business of huggin' trees and just generally
being liberal and messin' everything up that makes sense.
They can even rename their side California Lite.
Yes, we sportsmen have really taken a hit these past few years. Hound hunting, trapping with "makes sense traps or snares", and allowing Game Dept. monies go into the general fund.
Now, we will have wolves eating up our game resource.
The S.S.S. rule may need to be utilized, regarding wolves.

quote:

Originally posted by trouthunterdj:
Sorry to disagree with you 22WRF. Wolves never have left Minnesota and are apart of the Northern Boreal Forest Ecosystem. They should be in Minnesota. They are no longer apart of the Northern Rocky Ecosystem and shouldn't have been reintroduced. Or at the very least not reintoduced until a plan was set for a carrying capacity and a way to remove excess populations.

Reintroducing wolves was careless, thoughtless, and a misuse of resources.

ddj

No need to be sorry to disagree. Fair debate about the issue is a good thing.

The key words in your statement are "no longer" and "reintroduced".

I think its important to remember that they "once were" and therefore should not have had to have been "reintroduced".

Of course that is only my opinion. But then I think that the earth has reached a carrying capacity of human beings as well. Man kills far more animals on hiways every year than wolves kill in 10 years or maybe more. I would be for reducing the speed limit back down to 55 or 50 to save maybe 100,000 deer a year from being killed on hiways.

Last year, in Minnesota where I hunt, we could have 1 buck and 4 does. this year we can have 1 buck and 1 doe. the DNR said the decrease in population was because of weather kill. I wonder if that isn't the case in a lot of other places where wolves get blamed for drastic reduction in wildlife populations.