Okanagan Wolf Kill

[Fancy]

I haven't said one thing about the caribou in the Kootenays being affected by the wolf population here. Don't lump everyone together just because.

[Fancy]

My opinion is simple; If anybody, any group wants to do whatever it is that they want to do, they will create a framework of justification and call it whatever makes the deed less unsavory. That is how I feel about culls.

And as for backing up my opinion, I could argue that the cull itself is backup enough but you likely won't see it that way so then I am lost as to how I could possibly sway you.

"Sway"? Culling a pack was done to prevent major losses to ranchers as any other method did not work.

[mexi cali]

Understand that I know why culls are carried it out. I simply disagree with them because my belief is in the animals rights to live without interference from us unless it is to prevent the spread of disease. That was what I stated in my first post to this thread. Nature takes care of it's own with out help from us and has done for millions of years.

I grew up on a farm and saw the damage animals, domestic and otherwise were capable of when it came to livestock but even then my belief was that you accepted the threat of loss when you filled up a field with bait.

While animals, coyotes, weasels etc were killed when the opportunity presented itself, a cull was never suggested as a solution.

Unless you bring the animals on our planet closer to you from an equality perspective, you will never understand why I take the position I do.

[Fancy]

I grew up on a farm and saw the damage animals, domestic and otherwise were capable of when it came to livestock but even then my belief was that you accepted the threat of loss when you filled up a field with bait.

This wasn't about "threat of loss" - this WAS about loss - and substantial. Avail youself of the information.

[Rwede]

Understand that I know why culls are carried it out. I simply disagree with them because my belief is in the animals rights to live without interference from us unless it is to prevent the spread of disease. That was what I stated in my first post to this thread. Nature takes care of it's own with out help from us and has done for millions of years.

I grew up on a farm and saw the damage animals, domestic and otherwise were capable of when it came to livestock but even then my belief was that you accepted the threat of loss when you filled up a field with bait.

While animals, coyotes, weasels etc were killed when the opportunity presented itself, a cull was never suggested as a solution.

Unless you bring the animals on our planet closer to you from an equality perspective, you will never understand why I take the position I do.

So farming, which has one of the single most detrimental impacts on ecosystems and natural populations, is justified over hunters who work to conserve species and habitats, yet you're portraying hunters as demons. How very hypocritical.

[mexi cali]

So farming, which has one of the single most detrimental impacts on ecosystems and natural populations, is justified over hunters who work to conserve species and habitats, yet you're portraying hunters as demons. How very hypocritical.

I can't wait for you to assail me with the "facts" about this statement.

[Fancy]

mexicalidreamer - when your "bait" was completely exterminated, what was the results? Higher costs, insurance claims, rebuilding? Never mind the injuries sustained by cattle/sheep requiring vet care etc. etc. This wolf kill isn't out of the ordinary and will be hard to accomplish. One needs to do a lot more than just sit and wait for one to appear - they're not called ghosts for nothing.

[mexi cali]

This wasn't about "threat of loss" - this WAS about loss - and substantial. Avail youself of the information.

No need to get testy. Like I have said in a couple of ways, I understand culling. I don't agree with it even in the event of livestock loss.

To me, setting up a farm or ranch has inherent risks. One of those risks is livestock loss. And I say, you pays your money, you takes your chances. Simple.

Livestock loss is not justification in my eyes for culling animals who are merely behaving like animals. If they are being opportunistic, it's because we gave them the opportunity to do so by baiting the land.

I may be in the minority with my views. Heck, I may stand alone but that's OK with me.

I do not stand behind culls. Period.

[zzontar]

Wolves are horrible for keeping a natural balance, humans are by far the better choice.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 08605.html

Scientists estimate that the current rate at which species are becoming extinct is between 100 and 1,000 times greater than the normal "background" extinction rate - and say this is all due to human activity.

We are superior!

[Fancy]

No need to get testy. Like I have said in a couple of ways, I understand culling. I don't agree with it even in the event of livestock loss.

To me, setting up a farm or ranch has inherent risks. One of those risks is livestock loss. And I say, you pays your money, you takes your chances. Simple.

Livestock loss is not justification in my eyes for culling animals who are merely behaving like animals. If they are being opportunistic, it's because we gave them the opportunity to do so by baiting the land.

I may be in the minority with my views. Heck, I may stand alone but that's OK with me.

I do not stand behind culls. Period.

There was nothing testy about my remark - you said threat and it wasn't a threat but a done deed. One pack killed - don't they they even ate - over 120 sheep - not acceptable to the ranchers therefore that wolf pack culled.

[mexi cali]

mexicalidreamer - when your "bait" was completely exterminated, what was the results? Higher costs, insurance claims, rebuilding? Never mind the injuries sustained by cattle/sheep requiring vet care etc. etc. This wolf kill isn't out of the ordinary and will be hard to accomplish. One needs to do a lot more than just sit and wait for one to appear - they're not called ghosts for nothing.

That didn't happen to me or too anyone else I know if in the years we had our farm. In fact, the only animal I remember losing were a few chickens to the weasels but no cows.

No one else did either and we were surrounded by packs of coyotes.

Every once in a while, a cow would trip in a gopher hole. Par for the course and you fixed it up and life went on. we didn't call for a cull of the gopher population. They were a pain for sure but they were also a "fact" of life.

I will say this one more time. We as humans are not the ultimate authority on this planet even though we have assumed that role.

Nature, to quote a movie line "will find a way". It always has and It pisses me off that we have a history of eliminating that which we find to be inconvenient when what we really mean is what we find scary.

"You can judge a nation by how it treats its animals" (or words to that effect). I think Gandhi said that.

While I am not a pacifist, I am not violent by nature. I do feel more for animals than I do for human kind because so far, they have not tried to go out of their way to destroy their homes nor the homes of their peers.

We cannot make that claim and it is arrogance pure and simple that makes many of us act in ways that say nothing more than "we are the rulers of all we survey".

I call BS.

[Rwede]

Zontar's post has nothing to do with regulated hunting. But driving your car to work today certainly is detrimental to ecosystems.



Talk of a "wolf cull" in this thread is

This thread is not about any wolf cull. If wolves are to be culled, that will be a government program, not a hunting season, because it's impossible to achieve a cull through hunting. The hunting season is set up to be sustainable and not be a cull. Even if wolves were open 365 days per year with no bag limit, the numbers of wolves would not decrease whatsoever, but would continue to increase.

Someone mentioned above the 80% number to cull wolves, and that's accurate according to all studies I've read and my conversations with the provincial biologists.

The wolf hunt will not result in any decrease in wolf numbers in the Okanagan, in fact, the population will continue to grow even with the hunt in place.

This thread is about a wolf hunt. Let's keep it on topic.

[Fancy]

This thread is about a wolf hunt. Let's keep it on topic.

True - will be interesting if any are bagged this season.

[mexi cali]

Talk of a "wolf cull" in this thread is
This thread is about a wolf hunt. Let's keep it on topic.
Main Entry: cull  [kuhl] Show IPA
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: pick out for reason
Synonyms: choose, discriminate, elect, extract, glean, mark, opt for, optate, pluck, prefer, select, sift, single out, take, thin, thin out, winnow

The dictionary would disagree with you. Talk of a cull is very much on topic.

[Fancy]

Hunting in this case isn't about reducing the pack because they've been a problem - just that their numbers are up and can stand to be reduced somewhat. Packs do move around. Wildlife management use the word "cull" in a different manner generally speaking.