Okanagan Wolf Kill

[nextimeround]

You know nothing dies of old age in the wild. Wild animals die from disease, starvation, or predation. Of all of the predators man is the kindest. My 2 cents worth on the soap box to think about for today.

2 quick points. First humans are animals. Second, no human dies of old age. We all die of disease, starvation or predation (in this case not often for food). Of all animals man is by far the most callous and the only one who kills for sport. That's my 2 cents.

[nextimeround]

You seriously trying to convince me that wolves are more callous and dangerous than humans? Want to stack up examples of atrocities committed by humans verses wolves?

It's simply amazing that nature managed itself for tens if thousands of years without us humans to manage things. Phew just when I thought we were in trouble hunters will save the planet.

If you want to hunt that's great. But don't try t tell me that your hunting is helping maintain balance.

[KL3-Something]

You seriously trying to convince me that wolves are more callous and dangerous than humans? Want to stack up examples of atrocities committed by humans verses wolves?

It's simply amazing that nature managed itself for tens if thousands of years without us humans to manage things. Phew just when I thought we were in trouble hunters will save the planet.

If you want to hunt that's great. But don't try t tell me that your hunting is helping maintain balance.

No. I think he was responding to your comment that only human kill for sport. Whether or not you wish to admit it, wolves too hunt and kill for sport. I personally have found moose and deer that have been killed by wolves and left without being fed upon.

Again. Like someone else has said above. Read some of the literature from Dr. Val Geist. There is probably no one in North America, or the world more knowledgeable on the subject.

[zzontar]

zzontar wrote:

As opposed to human hunters, who want to kill the biggest, strongest animals, thereby weakening the species.

See the post above about how few fall into your generalization. Only 3% of BC's hunters are trophy hunters. 79% are meat hunters first and foremost. 18% are selective hunters (meat in the freezer is secondary) that hunt for other values, such as maximizing their time outdoors, or challenging themselves by using primitive weapons or hunting more difficult terrain, etc.

I meant wolves would kill the weakest deer in the herd where a hunter would take the biggest male with the biggest rack if possible, meaning wolves can be more beneficial to the deer species as a whole than people.

[Gone_Fishin]

I meant wolves would kill the weakest deer in the herd where a hunter would take the biggest male with the biggest rack if possible, meaning wolves can be more beneficial to the deer species as a whole than people.

The myth of their killing only the weak and sick has long been debunked. Wolves, like all predators, are opportunists. They'll kill whatever presents itself, including mature, prime breeding animals that are neither weak nor sick. The myth makes for good story books, but it's not the rule in the real world. Hunters, too, take whichever (if any!) legal animal presents itself, as only 3% hold out for the biggest rack or horns. Hunters, just like wolves, want meat for dinner, not antlers for the wall.

[Jo]

Time for a clean-up, will unlock when it is done.

[Fancy]

I meant wolves would kill the weakest deer in the herd where a hunter would take the biggest male with the biggest rack if possible, meaning wolves can be more beneficial to the deer species as a whole than people.

Hunters I know go for the meat - the rack is worthless and again depends on the tag. Not everyone gets a draw and a 2 point or spike isn't a big rack. Wolves kill for sport and don't always go for the weakest. Discovery Channel has had some great documentaries on wolves. Wolves were culled because of livestock killed. There is a time and place for culling and I'll be surprised if many wolves are culled by any other means other than traplines.

[Buckeye19]

If you have concerns contact a mod via PM.

Humans have become too desensitized to what really goes on and that's a large part of the problem. It's nice to see that there are more than a handful of people on here that understand the introduction of a wolf season.

It's too bad there are so many armchair biologists on here that post nonsense before actually having an understanding of what wildlife management means.

[wcasako]

"Every life deserves the same respect whether they have fur or skin."

If you are going to live by this standard and assign the same value to the lives of animals as you do humans, I have difficulty understanding how you can exist on the planet. The fact you live on Earth results in the death of animals and impact on habitat. Like it or not, directly or indirectly, meat eater or not, you kill animals to survive - this is fact, it's not up for debate. The fact you may not be the one doing the killing does not make you righteous.

People are a part OF nature not separate FROM nature. As a part of nature, humans kill animals just as wild animals kill each other - neither is wrong in doing so. Humans have the intelligence to regulate sport hunting and it has been proven for a century that wildlife benefits from sport hunting. Areas that have outlawed sport hunting have seen wildlife populations and habitat suffer. Once again this is fact - do your research and then rebut.

Wolves kill for fun - its fact, so do humans - neither is wrong. For those who keep talking about food and eating the kill, I suggest you spend more time in less populated areas of BC during spring to see moose calves left by wolves to rot - they kill for fun. Also, while in the wilderness you can appreciate the humanity of a wolf pulling a baby caribou from its mother during birth - it’s disgusting - its mean - its wild and is not wrong - its real life. Do not tell me a wolf has any more right to kill than a human. Whether human or wolf, putting an animal inside your mouth after killing it has nothing to do with conservation - once its dead - its dead - eating it makes no difference after something is dead. Ask the prey if being put into a mouth after death, makes it feel any better about losing its life.

What matters is healthy populations and healthy predator prey dynamics and quality habitat. Do some research on the reintroduction of wolves to the greater Yellowstone ecosystem and report back to discuss "natural balance". Humans are far to integrated in the natural systems of our environment to simply stand back and pretend everything will balance. Do your research on the caribou populations in BC and report back to the forum please - tell me if the natural balance means letting mountain caribou herds be extirpated by wolves. This is happening in BC right now and is not a wonderful natural process - it is the result of human influence on habitat to support your existence - the natural balance utopic dream was lost long ago. Unfortunate as this may be – its reality – accept it and work towards constructive goals.

I would think most would agree humans killing at a rate that negatively impacts populations is not desirable - this does not happen under legal sport hunting - if you tell me it does - show me where please. Hunters benefit wildlife – its proven over and over and will continue going forward. Who would of thunk it hey?? ..how could hunting benefit wildlife???..a paradox right?? Sorry, this is reality - its fact.

It is incredibly interesting those against the hunting of wolves, and the Okanagan hunt in particular, are just now being made aware of this via castanet. If you truly were interested in wildlife, habitat issues and conservation, you would have been aware of the moves toward this season approximately two years ago. It would be impossible to be interested and involved in conservation and not be aware of this long before the story ran on Castanet. The reality is, you are not interested or informed on factual conservation matters - you do, however, want to use emotion, threats, name calling and rhetoric to impose your values on others because you have decided killing animals is wrong. Once again, this is perplexing considering you kill animals to live on this planet whether directly or indirectly. You are not the innocent pure being you imagine yourself to be.

If you truly were interested in supporting wildlife and habitat conservation, you would invest your time educating yourself on the important issues in our province, and donate money and time to the cause. Unfortunately, your interests do not lie with conservation, but rather with imposing your belief that an animal dying at the hands of a human is a moral wrong.

For those commenting on trophy hunting - do you even know what trophy hunting is?? Trophy hunting is setting specific standards for the animal being pursued which results in fewer animals taken, as trophy hunters set goals which are difficult to achieve. A "trophy hunter" must follow the same laws as everyone else regarding taking edible portions of the animal for consumption. Please do not confuse poachers with hunters – these words are not synonyms.

There is zero conservation risk to the Okanagan wolf population as a result of this hunt. I would be surprised if this hunt results in the death of five wolves. However, even five wolves dying will be a travesty in your eyes because any animal dying at the hands of a human is immoral. Please do not forget that you kill animals and impact habitat by existing on this planet.

If your passion and energy could be directed to a cause more beneficial than rants against hunters, we could all accomplish great things in conservation. Unfortunately history has shown you will prefer to spend your time slandering others, rather than educating yourself and moving forward constructively and cooperatively.

[rutland1]

So why have the hunt at all if only 5 wolves are going to be killed. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[wcasako]

For the exact same reason we hunt other animals. Being outdoors is enjoyable and hunting is enjoyable. If five wolves get killed fine, if thirty get killed, fine - there is no conservation concern with this hunt.

Do you have a concern?

[keeny]

I can understand hunting for food, even though we mass-produce enough meat for the entire population and often throw it out because it sat too long at the grocery store, but hunting just for "sport"? Are we not intelligent enough to see how silly that is? You REALLY need to go out and shoot an animal that is of no direct threat to you, for fun? The thrill of the hunt?

Wolves may do this, because they are a wild beast, incapable of logic, reasoning and morals. They rely on instinct, and we as humans are (mostly) capable of discerning when our instincts need to be ignored, and rational, critical thinking needs to take over. If you are incapable of this, and still feel the need to strike down one of these majestic beasts from hundreds of feet away with a rifle, I truly pity you.

Strikes me as cowardly, psychotic behavior...

[tazmandew]

For the exact same reason we hunt other animals. Being outdoors is enjoyable and hunting is enjoyable. If five wolves get killed fine, if thirty get killed, fine - there is no conservation concern with this hunt.

Do you have a concern?

Did you know that wolves mate for life and can have up to 42 offspring living in a pack?

So if the shoe was on the other foot and the wolves wanted to hunt one of your family members as long as they are enjoying themselves everything would be fine? Do you really consider yourself more superior then an animal? Can you really tell me you wouldn't have a concern?

Just because we are told it's okay to do something sometimes it isn't the case when faced in a similar situation.

[SmokeOnTheWater]

... it has been proven for a century that wildlife benefits from sport hunting.

I'm sure the buffalo would agree with that.
http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/news-near-extinction-american-bison

[Fancy]

Buffalo are hard to hunt and off topic. This is about the wolf hunt.