| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,942,558
|
Article: 11976
[Animals]
Date Posted:
1/10/2005
6:46:49 am EST
Wvox Stats
Views: 18,090
RSS: 4,155
Comments: 25
|
Decade After Being Reintroduced, Gray Wolves Thrive - And So Does Controversy
Author: Becky Bohrer, Associated Press Source: Tampa Bay Online
Title: DECADE AFTER BEING REINTRODUCED, GRAY WOLVES THRIVE - AND SO DOES CONTROVERSY
  It was a frigid January day a decade ago when the first gray wolves bolted out of crates and into the wilds of Idaho.
The event was cheered by environmentalists, who had once wondered if they would ever see wolves reintroduced into the Northern Rockies, and decried by ranchers and others who had hoped it would never happen.
Ten years later, passions still run deep. The wolves' incredible recovery and expansion in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have ensured that.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 25 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| A Better Way Of Managing Public Lands... | Jan 11th. at 2:58:09 pm EST |
by Lonnie Murray (Charlottesville, VA) - wc_xemail - Web
I've noticed a few ranchers have posted, so let me throw out a suggestion...
Why not let the free market decide some of these questions? In much of politics, free trade has become almost a religion of sorts, but seems to be applied unequally.
I say we allow environmental groups to bid on federal land at the same rate that we allow ranchers, loggers, and miners. If that means the price of beef or wool has to go up then so be it. Currently the value of the land is higher for recreational purposes than for agricultual, or other uses, so why not let the market decide? In other words, if the public wants cows then it can pay to have them, and if we want wolves and wilderness then we'll pay for that instead. As is, environmental groups are exluded for bidding or buying rights rights for federal land, and the parks are going bankrupt from subsidies.
Seems only fair to allow us to put our money out there too!
Lonnie
|
| Try For A Moment To Imagine.... | Jan 10th. at 11:03:06 pm EST |
by Amorella (Southeastern NM) - wc_xemail
You own a piece of land that is a full 250 square miles, in the wilds of New Mexico... On this land, you have 2, 000 head of cattle, and around 10, 500 head of sheep. You have about 8 hands to work this land (that means keeping up with fences, ALL the livestock, chores, and making sure the wells and water tanks are in working order plus numerous things I cant even start to mention!) Now, I know it may be a hard concept for people who don’t live out here to realize, but there are stretches out here where you can walk for miles and miles, and miles without even seeing a sign of another human.
Ranchers are not supermen, Lamas can be dangerous (and are a general pain in the butt, trust me!) and sheep dogs are notorious for hitting about three years of age, then they begin to kill off the lambs as they hit the ground... And I think I will start taking volunteers for pinning them all up at night! (Wow, just imagine the size of THAT barn!) The thing is, their is no "Perfect" solution. The Ranchers are trying to make it work, perhaps not all of them, but the large majority of them are.
Until it is your personal livelihood wrapped up in a herd, perhaps judgment should be reserved. After all, it is the Ranchers who supply this world with very many things that we all use every day, and despite popular thought, they care very deeply for their animals, and their herds, much like the Pagans of old did... The Norse, the Celts, the Egyptians, the Romans and Greeks all herded animals... How can we as Pagans glorify those cultures, but be so hateful to the same culture that has had to grow with our times?
Perhaps I get a bit touchy when it is implied that an entire section of our culture, one that does a heck of a lot to care and tend the land, are just a lazy lot, and only care for their personal profit... Out here, where a balance can, and is being maintained, the real rapists of the land tend to be big oil companies, and uncaring tourists who know nothing of how things really work.
I think that Agriculture is generally overlooked, and often misunderstood buy many people who have never had to dig their livings from the dust of the land... Like our Pagan forefathers did.
Never forget your roots, and always respect Mamma Earth.
Amorella
|
| Who Is The Real Problem Here? | Jan 10th. at 9:00:28 pm EST |
by Pam (Chicago, IL) - wc_xemail
Well, a few comments here. I have a BS in Zoology, and also lived on the Coloado plains for two years in the early 1990s, and have studied wolves to a fair extent.
Wolves normally take out the old and the weak and the sick because they are the easiest to catch, not because they specifically *want* the old and sick and weak. They also take the very young, and can, at times, decimate generations of prey animals. Young moose, for example, are particularly vulnerable. But when wolves can catch healthy animals, that's what they go for; they are usually meatier and fatter... etc.
As far as eating livestock goes, yeah, I can to an extent sympathize with the ranchers. But I also feel rather the same way that I do about people who live in the woods and get bothered by bears in their garbage, or people who leave pets out where there are coyotes and expecting the coyotes to be exterminated because they ate the pet. There is sympathy for the loss, but also a deep wish that the human would take responsibility.
In many studies done in Minnesota, it was found that a majority of farmers and ranchers who suffered multiple livestock loss engaged in improper procedures for disposing of dead animals, placentas, and the like. In other words, they left cow/sheep meat and blood lying around. So the wolf gets an easy meal. The wolf learns the taste and scent of livestock. The wolf finds out that livestock move slowly (compared to wild ungulates) and have relatively puny defences. So, basically, the human has set up a nice buffet dinner, and then gets upset that the meal is accepted.
Granted, this is not *all8 of the cases, but the number is significant. For these people, I don't think they should be eligible for restitution. I think they should pay for the cost of dealing with now-problem predators. I feel the same way about people who have improperly-covered garbage cans who two months later demand that the grizzly be relocated or killed.
Because that's what happens to problem predators. They lost a fear of people, or learned that they could get an easier meal. They learned these behaviors because of the actions of people. Yet they are the ones who have to suffer.
No, the wolf is not perfect. Yes, it causes problems. Tough. Overgrazing causes problems, overfarming causes problems, pesticides cause problems, deforestation causes problems. I don't see a lobby to shoot all the loggers, farmers, and ranchers. So leave the wolf be. Stop b*tching and learn how to live with them. Or else find a new line of work.
|
| No Title | Jan 10th. at 8:16:42 pm EST |
by Some Guy (Earth) - wc_xemail
The ranchers have to do what they have to do. He has to survive too. Now someone on here mentioned llamas...that is true! Llamas are very good guard animals for both sheep and cattle. Nobody I've talked to has ever heard of this, which is too bad, because it would reduce most of the predation in thier herds. All you can do is try and inform those that need to know this information. Find More info -- HERE
|
| Not Only The Wolf Is Making A Come Back | Jan 10th. at 6:19:34 pm EST |
by Silver Faery (USA) - wc_xemail
I am glad to hear that the wolf is making the comeback, and that the enviroment is being battered for it. I have known both farmers and ranchers my whole life, and they have every right to worry about the animals taking the herds, those cattle are the life of these families.
They have alsor reintroduced the Mountain Lion back into parts of Colorado and Kansas. My father in law, found on on his property last year, in a face of with my brother in laws dog. He understands they are there for controlling the deer population, but if they were to attack and eat his cattle, he has every right to shot it on the spot. For aht animal will no longer go after the deer, when all it has to do is get into pasture land and have a cow!
These animals are doing their job and as long as they do, then they will be left alone, if they get into the very herds that this nation uses, then that farmer or rancher has a right to shot them.
Please don't take this as going with the "Bad" guys. I know there has to be balance, and most farmers and ranchers do as well. IN fact like stated before they are the ones in Kansas at least that still have miles of Pasture land, that they do not farm. and leave to nature, for if the land is healthy, then the herds are healthy!
Silver Faery
|
| Other Options For Ranchers | Jan 10th. at 6:12:44 pm EST |
by Reverie (California) - wc_xemail
Many ranchers that are complaining and killing wolves for predation on their herds - either of cattle or sheep are ignoring or refusing to institute other methods of protecting their livestock -
Many breeds of sheep-dogs have been developed to bond with the sheep and protect their herd from predators including wolves, cougar, and bear.
Sheperds - now that is an old concept - and apparently just too much work these days.
BLM Burros - many adopters of wild burros have found that they will bond with and protect herds of cattle or sheep from predators. These animals are adopted out from the US Govt. for $125.00 and up. In So. Cal. there is usually a waiting list for these animals and many of the people on it are sheep breeders.
The ranchers - close to the earth or not - need to look back to older ways of protecting their animals from predators. And if it gets down to that - they should bring the animals into pens or barns each night. Free-grazers pay little for the use of Federal land (used to be about $3/head) and still they bitch about their losses. As a horse breeder I am well aware that there are losses even in controlled situations and free-range ranches must expect even higher losses given that they are essentially sending their animals out to live in the wild and eat for nearly free until they are old enought to slaughter.
No sympathy from me on this one. We need to protect the natural environments we have left and this includes keeping large and small predators in place. Wolves, sharks, rattlesnakes, mountain lions - all have there place in the world's ecosystem. Humans are the ones that screw everything up.
Unfortunately with Bush back for another term I fear defeat for this issue - he just signed a bill legalizing the sale of wild horses to slaughter - an issue I helped battle back in the '70s. Now it seems we'll take a trip back even further in U.S. history. Take a look at some of the pictures from the era of the "wolf wars." I've seen photos of litteraly hundreds of wolf carcasses thrown into piles to be burned. And a bounty (money) was paid for each death.
I can support such an effort to exterminate an animal accidently introduced into and destroying an eco-system to which it is not native (ie: Lousiana's bounty on Nutria) but certainly not for a native predator.
|
| Round And Round | Jan 10th. at 5:14:49 pm EST |
by marjoe (tokeka kansas) - wc_xemail
this thing about we need the wolves to control the deer and little predators etc. Its like this monty python cartoon-- 'the attack of the killer cars'. the cars hide behind trees and the corners of buildings and jump out and crush people. the problem is solved through the miracle of radioactive mutation-- the city uses radiation to create giant killer cats and they slurp up the cars with their tongues.
the people come out crying 'thank you, thank you for saving our city!'-- and the giant cat slurps them up. now, says the narrator, the problem was what to do about the giant killer cats. they use radiactive mutation to create a giant cow, who slurps up the cats.
the people of the city come out to thank the giant cow, and guess what? he slurps up the people.
what to do about the killer cows? they use radioactive mutation to create a giant foot, which crushes the cow. when the people come out crying 'thank you for saving our city!' the giant foot crushes them. somehow, the cartoon ended.
introduce wolves-- it would be good if they chases down great big strong elk with strong legs and large antlers and from whom the wolves sometimes suffer broken ribs, but sheep and cattle are a lot less evergy and risk for a wolf-- and wolves have been known to kill hundreds of sheep in one night and pick at certain organs only. I think to control the wolves we'll need cougars and mountain lions. now, cougars and mountain lions have been known to attack people, and probably would take on a wolf only as a last resort-- and i'm sure they wouldn't turn away sheep and cattle -- what to do about the mountain lions and cougars? hmmmm.........
|
| Two Sides To Every Coin. | Jan 10th. at 5:07:08 pm EST |
by Amorella (Southeastern NM) - wc_xemail
I have to say that I am very glad that wolves are making a comeback to their natural habitat. I think it is very healthy for the all around ecosystem. But also I think that many people do misunderstand the impact it can have on Ranchers and their livestock.
I grew up on ranches my entire life, and wonder sometimes why ranchers are depicted as such "Bad Guys" with environmentally aware people. You will rarely find another group of people who care so deeply for the land, and work so hard to live their lives in balance with nature. They are not a bunch of Pirates, out to rape and pillage the land (That would be quite silly for them to do, as they HAVE to have healthy land so their livestock can be healthy too!)
As for the wolf issue, it is VERY hard in this age of feedlots for free range cattlemen to make the money it takes to keep their ranches running... For some of the smaller operations out there, one pack of wolves can dig very deeply into their pocketbooks, and if they have sheep, it can completely ruin it. Think along of the lines if you owned a Mom and Pop convince store, and had a group of ruffians who shoplifted every day... It would eat up money you could hardly afford to lose.
For the most part, Ranchers have a tougher time than the media put up there, and they (The Media) seem to pick out rich, obnoxious ranchers for their stories. But trust me, Most ranchers are closer to being Pagan than some of the pagans I know, so lets not paint them up to be bad guys. After all, most of them truly are stewards of the land, and only want to be able to keep their livelyhoods safe.
Blessings, Amorella
|
| Up Close And Personal... | Jan 10th. at 3:16:51 pm EST |
by Stormsinger (Milwaukee, WI) - wc_xemail
I went to the Canadian Rockies this past summer, and I found out a LOT about wolves. Banff National Park in Alberta is DESPERATELY trying to INCREASE their wolf population, currently down to one elderly female and (possibly) a younger male who recently wandered in. Now, why would one of the busiest parks in North America want to get the wolf population up as quickly as they can?
Because the entire park area, which includes a couple of towns, a couple of the biggest and grandest resort hotels this side of Vegas and a lot of outdoor enthusiasts, is DROWNING in elk and mule deer. I am not kidding. Elk and mule deer walk down the town streets like they own them. They cross roads like they have a permanent right of way. They are a serious danger to humans during the mating season. And they are eating themselves out of house and home. There is simply not enough food to go around a population of grass-eaters that have no predators to keep them in check.
The Bow Valley (home of Banff National Park) used to be home to cougar, lynx, black bear, grizzly bear, and wolves. Also Elk, Moose, Mule Deer, rabbits, muskrat, beaver... you get the idea. Humans removed almost every cougar, lynx and wolf in the mix, and made a SERIOUS dent in the bear population. They almost wiped out beaver and muskrat. As a result, overgrazing and overpopulation by the grass-eaters has cause soil erosion, deep incursions into human-populated areas where once fear kept them away. The lack of "water-control" animals is causing increasing problems with smaller waterways, leading to erosion, loss of wetlands, and in conjunction with overgrazing, a loss of water quality. You can't drink the water from a mountain stream in Banff anymore -- it has some nasty bacteria in it that needs to be cleared out first.
A couple of healthy packs of wolves could do a lot to change that. Not coyotes -- they are essentially scavengers, not hunters. Wolves. You'd end up with healthier grass-eaters, cleaner water, more vigorous forests and meadows, and a balanced ecology. Removing the predators (and we are NOT an adequate substitute, predators though we may be) is like cutting of the head of a local ecology -- and very few things live long or well without their heads.
|
| Canid Facts | Jan 10th. at 1:19:51 pm EST |
by Momma Bird (Up in Alaska) - wc_xemail
With the extirpation of the wolf, the coyote population exploded. A smart, adaptable animal, the coyote has spread to every state in the union in the last 100 years. The coyote has even been found within cities and suburbs.
Since the re-introduction of the wolf into areas such as Yellowstone Nat. Park, they have been knocking down the coyote population and actually making the elk and deer herds more healthy. There was an excellent article in Audubon by Ted Williams about the Yellowstone wolves this past summer.
It has been proven that when canid populations are "reduced", litter sizes get larger.
I'd say most of the ranchers are acting out of generations of predjudiceagainst the wolf. Though a wolf will take domestic livestock if the opportunity exists. Here in AK, our wolf population is very healthy. In some areas the animals have been coming into the villages and attacking pets in their yards. People are afraid for their kids. Some are contending that the moose population is too low , and therefore the state has started arial huntning by special agent. While a very controversial practice, areial hunting is the most effective way to reduce wolves in an area. There is a big debate going on about this in the state right now. Personnally, I hate the practice, and I feel that if the locals want less wolves, they should go out and hunt and trap them theirselves instead of asking the gov. to do it for them.
I agree totally with an earlier poster about the use of public lasnd to graze livestock and then ranchers get mad when the wildlife infringes on their profits. I've lived in the west and seen the rangelands, a good bit of which has been completely destroyed by cattle. We used to call them range maggotts.
We have proven that we can co-exist with big predators, with just a bit of common sense and tolerance.
|
| Sometimes Profit Means Loss | Jan 10th. at 1:12:55 pm EST |
by Betty Wilkins (Peoria, Illinois) - wc_xemail
I can see why the ranchers are screaming. After all, they had it their own way for quite a few years and seeing wolves coming back doesn't make any Rancher's day. But the Wolves have only their cunning and their teeth, the same things they had when the Neanderthals roamed the world. The Ranchers have a lot more than they did then and a lot less reason for persecution save for profit.
As I see it, the wolves have lost much more than the Ranchers ever will and are probably
only one species in hundreds of thousands that would if they could speak, resent the fact that humanity shares the same world with them only to take it from them and drive them from their homelands without so much as a by your leave. And oddly, it's for many of the very same reasons that men have made war on one another. Still, there has to be a way for animals and humans to share the same space together, and it's up to us to find it. Frankly, I think its high time we as people reigned ourselves in a little, before we all lose everything. After all, we really don't own this world either, we're just passing through, and who said extinction was only for dinosaurs anyway?
|
| Tough | Jan 10th. at 12:42:04 pm EST |
by Issobell (USA) - wc_xemail
The ranchers and the hunters seem to forget that THEY are the alien species, not wolves. If they don't like predators, too bad. It's like my mom complaning about her deer eating her roses when she lived in an area near forests. The deer, and the wolves, were there first and the ranchers et cetera are the invaders, not the animals. It's like White people complaining about Native American treaty fishing rights when Whites were the outsiders who brought to this country their high fat diabetes causing, heart clogging and Earth polluting diet such as beef and sheep. I do not feel a bit sorry for the ranchers or the hunters. Being vegetarian is more healthy way of living and one that is more suited to this country's sustainability. Cattle causes waste pollution and topsoil erosion and is a blight like most introduced species. Go wolves (and coyotes) !
|
| Different Ways Of Hunting | Jan 10th. at 12:38:26 pm EST |
by ShadowBear (Coalville Utah) - wc_xemail
The wolfs take the sickly or the young and leave the best of the herd to survive for another year to pass on their genes.
The hunters take the best of the herd and leave the sickly to pass on their genes.
You decide which way is best for the herd.
|
| Finally | Jan 10th. at 12:25:23 pm EST |
by StormRaven (Idaho) - wc_xemail
The Reintroduction was Humanity finally saying "Hey, we screwed up but we caught it in time. We'll fix this." So we did. We put the wolves back where they came from, and we put in strict rules concerning how ranchers could deal with them. Hooray!
And for those people out there who have never seen Idaho, the previous poster was right. Idaho is a free range state... meaning even if there are fences, that doesn't mean sh*te. If a cow gets on the highway and wrecks your car... you have to pay damages to the rancher. The cows are more of a nuisance than the wolves... trust me.
Not to mention that some ranchers do keep cattle penned... but they keep way too many of them in too small a pasture. Then the wind picks up, and you can smell it from 10 miles away. I'm not joking about that. Picture a big green field. Then picture that field fenced. Inside the fence are so many cattle that you can't see the ground anymore. That's what I'm talking about. A wolf won't go up against that, they'd get trampled when the cattle get spooked. They'll go after the stupid guy that wanders away from the herd.
|
| Wolves... | Jan 10th. at 11:29:02 am EST |
by Ravenna Angelline (Renton, WA, USA) - wc_xemail
My son was gifted an Adoption certificate this Yule for a Wolf pup up in Alaska. He has a little certificate that we framed, and a stuffed howling wolf for him to hold onto to remind him of this.
Wolves are fascinating creatures, and I am glad that they are doing so well.
Coyotes on the other hand... they scare me a bit. I live in a suburb of Seattle... and we have a pack of coyotes that roam our neighborhood. The more construction of new housing that goes on... the more we see of them. Imagine a 13 year old girl waking up in the night to find a pack of coyotes in the yard eating the garbage. That was spooky nearly 15 years ago. This last summer... they ate my cat.
So I'll agree with the other poster that said coyotes are more of a nuisance... they DON'T seem to have any fear.
Hooray for the wolves!!
~ Ravenna Angelline
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
