If I understand the video correctly, they are mad because there are less elk for hunting now that wolves have been reintroduced. (I admittedly was a bit distracted during the video as it was not exactly riveting and I got off an airplane a couple hours ago.)
From what I get from this the wolf (beautiful animal) is running wild and growing well past their sustainability. My thoughts....RESPONSIBLE hunters are the greatest conservationists the world has ever known!
Where ever HUNTERS are LIGHTLY managed the wild life has increased and thrived!
Haz, I get what you're saying and generally agree with it, but I see this with a different perspective than most of you likely will.
I am from the scientific side of things.
The following is not a shot at anyone on here, but simply my opinion.
First, I am 100% for hunting (responsibly). I hunt, my career depends on hunting, and I wish everybody would give it a try and take their kids. I really don't care what you're hunting, but get out there and do it. If you choose not to hunt, get your butt outside to enjoy wildlife anyway and, at least, be open to the benefits of hunting.
Some animals do not need to be hunted because of reduced numbers from over hunting in the past/habitat loss. Some animals need to be eradicated (pigs, feral cats, etc).
Added after original post: A downside to hunting vs natural predation is that hunters tend to remove the best, most fit individuals; whereas, predators tend to remove the weakest, oldest, less fit individuals.
end of editSecond, when it comes to wildlife management/biology, everybody is an expert in their opinion. Guess what? They're not.
Third, as with most things, people really need to look at historical data before getting overly worked up about what's happening today. Just because something is changing from how you know it and think should be doesn't mean it's going in the wrong direction. "White man" started screwing stuff up as soon as he set foot on this continent and industrialization took it into overdrive. The way things were in the 20th century isn't likely to be the same as they were historically. These guys are used to the large elk herds that developed in the absence of a primary predator, the wolf. They need to realize that wolves have been eating elk for thousands of years and keeping their numbers in check. I cannot speak to the historical number of elk in the Yellowstone as I have not researched it, but I will give an example with white tailed deer in the East. They were severely over hunted and extirpated from much of their natural range. They were successfully reintroduced in the 20th century and now they are pest in many places. (I realize this is kind of the argument against wolves in the video, but I'll get to that later.) There are few, if any, natural historical predators of these deer left besides man. In many of those same places, hunters still don't think there are enough deer. They also don't understand why they have poor deer.
Fourth, people really need to look at the large-scale ecological scenario and impact of what's happening. This is kind a close follow up to point 3 above. Studies have shown how large elk herds (with no wolves present) in yellowstone have destroyed the vegetation in the region, especially in river/stream bottoms. This severely effects the plant composition, the animals that depend on the native vegetation, the soil quality, the water quality, the animals in the water, erosion, etc. The areas almost become baren. Take an identical landscape with an elk herd where wolves are present, it's lush an natural because the elk avoid it because they are more prone to depredation those regions. The wolves only have to occaisionally kill an elk there to remind them that they don't need to be there.
Fifth, the wolf population may be outgrowing the original bounderies and very well may be able to be delisted in certain regions, but they are only getting back to where they are supposed to be not where they were before we killed them all. The guy said somthing along the lines of "We're having more problems with grizzley bears. The wolves have to be causing it." People need to realize that if you move into someone's home without their consent (the bears, wolves, wildlife in general, other people) you can't get mad at them for doing what they do. Predators do a very good job of managing who gets what among themselves.
Sixth, Have I mentioned people have a tendency to screw things up?
Seventh, I will be the first to admit that wildlife biologists aren't perfect and have made some serious mistakes in the past (predator eradication, most of the non-native plant/animals that were introduced, etc.). I'm sure some practices we consider good now will be "what the hell were we/they thinking back then" in a few decades. However, we are learning from our mistakes and generally headed in a better direction.
Eighth, there's likely a lot more to most anti-wolf people than just "they're killing our elk." I'm sure many of these people have had livestock eaten by wolves. I really do have some sympathy for them, but it goes back to living in the wolves home. I realize that technically the wolves didn't live there when most of these people moved into the neighborhood, but it's still the wolves home.
My main point is that people really need to look at the entire picture instead of just one piece of it and that they need to look beyond what they "know" is right to what it was like before people messed it up.
I think that's it for now. I may add more later, but I need a break from my soapbox.
MBTV
Forum Index
Help
Calendar
Contact Info
Register as a member
