I signed the petition.

I thought they just released them back into Yellowstone. Why? So they can shoot them?
Leslie

me too!!

I just don't understand the whole Wolf thing. They became extinct so they brought in Wolves from Canada and introduced them to Yellowstone. They formed their Social groups and mated. Now they are over populated.

Why did the they even bother to bring the Wolves in? Supposedly Wolves don't "hunt" and kill healthy animals, only the "weak" which would die anyway.

One Bison or Elk would feed a pack for a month. Wolves can go days without food.

The big problem is that the Wolves are going to nearby Ranches and killing cattle. If you are a Cattle Rancher, you know, when you loose a Calf, it is very costly.

I see both sides to this story. But, the whole thing could have been left to nature and everything would have been as it should be.

Gayle

Wolves are no longer on the Endangered Species List.
The protected Yellowstone Wolves proliferated far faster than anyone imagined and Yellowstone and the surrounding states are saturated with them. There is an overpopulation now. Collared Yellowstone Dogs have been found many many states away.

They can only be shot if proven to be a threat to people, pets or livestock. Wolves are hard on wildlife too. It was at first assumed wolves will kill only if raising a litter of pups. Fact is, wolves are predators and will kill for the sake of killing.

Lori

There were no wolves in Yellowstone and they were reintroduced a few years back and the packs have increased rapidly as the wolves don't have any enimies to kill them off. If you've ever seen a wolf pack kill you would not feel sorry for them, they are vicious. Yes,and they kill lots of animals that are not old or injured. Yes, they kill the rancher's cows and calves. Could you afford to loose a $2,000 cow or calf? That sorta takes the profit from a Rancher's livehood. Wolves in my area were nearly illimated as they killed farmer's livestock, dogs and other animals. IN the early 1900's they even took small children who were outside their parents view. I can absolutely see no good that they can possibly do as they really are vicious killers. Their fur is no good to anyone as it absolutely stinks ! The old and mained and crippled Elk and Buffalo would die a natural death without them ! What happened to them before they brought the wolves back? People who fight to keep the wolves have never ever lived in the country and witnessed such vicious attacks as they are capable of. When I was a child my parents would never let me wander in the woods near our home for fear the wolves would surround and kill me. The writer before me is correct, they kill for the fun of killing.

Posieh & Lori:

I beg to differ.

MAN is the only creature that kills for the fun of killing.

While I agree that wolves are "vicious" predators, they are no more vicious than any other predatory, meat-eating animal.

Wolves, as well as all other creatures, except for Man, kill for survival in the form of food.

If the wolves in Yellowstone are killing livestock, why are farmers/ranchers allowed to use public land for grazing?

I don't want to get into a political discussion, and, in the final analysis, that's what this is - Politics - no different than the issue of oil drilling in the public lands of Alaska.

If Yellowstone is overpopulated with wolves, then steps must be taken to thin the packs. Then further steps must be taken to prevent over-population.

Ellen

This is probably a topic for the Animal debates forum but I have a comment anyway.LOL
I totally agree with you Gayle,why not just let nature take it's course? Maybe the Wolve's extinction was meant to be,kinda like the Dinosaur.
"If the wolves in Yellowstone are killing livestock, why are farmers/ranchers allowed to use public land for grazing?"
I don't know,are ranchers allowed to graze public land?
Do you think the Yellowstone wolves might not venture off the grounds and onto surrounding ranch land? I don't think they would know where the property line is.LOL

I am really torn on this one. I am an animal lover so firstly I say do not allow them to be killed. On the other hand I can understand how a rancher may feel when one of his animals is killed. Yes wolves are vicious killers. So are sharks. The only difference I see is that wolves have more human contact because we have encroached on their territory. If the population of wolves must be controlled to prevent extinction because of lack of food, then I am for it. But if it is only to allow man to further encroach on their territories and take over then I am against it.
Polar Bears in the North that come into town looking for food (because the ice fields are shrinking) are trapped, relocated and released. They are not shot unless they are endangering someones life.
I think more thought should be put into looking for other solutions.

I just watched a National Geographic DVD on Yellowstone, part of it was on the wolves. According to this program, they were wiped out men hunting them. It wasn't a natural process.

Wolves know where the property line is as well as livestock know where the line is! LOL

Seriously, though, the Dept. of Agriculture and the National Park Service do allow ranchers to use parts of Yellowstone for grazing.

Wolves will not become extict the way dinosaurs did, at least not in a "natural" way. They will become extinct when man hunts them to extinction. Who gives man the right to do that?

Ellen

The notion any animal, except man of course, kills for fun is silly and I didn't say that. What I did say is wolves don't hunt for the meat or survival. I said wolves are pedators and they will kill just for the sake of killing. That is their nature.

Because of this, as Posieh said, wolves were almost eradicated in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Why? Because they were killing the livelihood of those settling the land.
Wolves a century ago are what we in the west are dealing with today; a predator with no natural enemy to keep the balance...the circle of life if you will. They are killing our profits; taking away money we use to support our families, pay taxes and make a contribution to society.

To many, who do not deal with the loss of profit (and again, the means to support our families, pay taxes, contribute to communities, etc. etc.) shooting a wolf is a horrible thing to contemplate. Why? Because what the wolves are doing does not affect YOU, your bank account and your means to make a living.

This would be like me telling Kath the poor management at the hospital where she works (which drives her crazy on an almost daily basis) is trivial and acceptable based on the fact that it does not affect me personally. (I use Kath as an example simply because we've known each other for ever and ever and I know what she does to support her family. I'm not picking on her, okay?)

Can you see the point I'm trying to make?

A hundred years ago it was either people or the wolves.
And there is a reason they were hunted down. I have seen a wolf kill and it's ugly. Horrible. The killed animals suffered a terrible death and the carcass was left behind.

Sad?
Maybe.

Would you have me, my family, my husband's family and all other livestock producers just give it up and turn everything we own over to the wolves?

Why?

To make someone far, far far removed from wolves feel better?

It's either people or the wolves.
To think someone would pick a wild animal over a family (or lots of families) is just...well, sad. And wrong.

Yes. Humanity is encroaching on the wolves. And the grizzly. And the spotted owl and the....the list is long.

What do you want done?
Thin out the existing human population so the animals have a place to live?
Okay.
Who goes first?
And how will they be eliminated?

Another idea to eliminate people and turn the land over to the wolves (who I assure you, pay ZERO income tax, LOL), but with a far slower impact in favor of the wolf, would be zero population growth.

I am being as respectful as I can be. If I offend I don't mean to. I'm just trying to make the existence of my family, my husband's family and all others who make their living raising livestock as important as anyone else in America.

I am an animal lover.
I also know if it comes down to a either or situation I will pick the person every time.

Lori

I just saw where public lands use was questioned.

When the US finished running the English off and claiming America once and for all the government was faced with finding a way to get the land settled.

One solution was the Homestead Act.
Within the homestead act was what is (although not PC anymore)known as public grazing rights. A rancher/farmer and his wife could claim X amount of land and improve it and it became theirs. So the family could become successful (and pay taxes to support the new country) it was allowed the ranchers could graze X amount of animals on public lands based on how many deeded acres they owned. This allowed the farmers and ranchers to harvest crops on deeded land during the summer months while animals grazed on public lands.

Grass on public lands (as is anywhere else) is a very renewable resource and provides more income for a family on which to pay taxes.

Ranchers pay what is called an AUM or animal unit measure to the Bureau of Land Management *BLM) or the US Forest Service for the grazing right. This amount is not much, something like four dollars a month per pair of sheep or cows. However, in ADDITION to that $4 AUM the rancher must also provide care for his cattle, build and maintain any government fences on public land and improve water at their expense. Any and all improvements are mandated by the government but paid for by the rancher. That four dollars per unit, after everything else is paid for, is more like 18 to 25 dollars per month per pair.

I did not know grazing was allowed in the Yellowstone. If it is allowed it would be in the most primitive areas of the park. Perhaps if grazing had been allowed the Yellowstone fires in the late eighties would not have happened? If grass isn't eaten (or mowed down...it's much like your lawn) it grows tall and rank and dry as tinder and it doesn't take much of a spark to set the whole country on fire.

Some claim ranchers abuse public lands.
There probably are those who do but they don't hold onto their permits very long. Not only does the government have strict guidelines other ranchers aren't going to put up with someone threatening THEIR livelihoods. WHY would a rancher mess around with something his business depends upon?

Grass grows back.
Grass is a renewable resource.
If you want to hang onto your permit to graze public land you take care of the land because you depend upon it.

Lori

I don't feel picked on at all, Lori. I do understand where you're coming from having grown up in rural NV. (big coyote problems with ranchers there) I don't have a problem with reducing the population of the wolves if it saves them from being completely wiped off the face of the earth. I don't think we have the right to do that.

According to the show I was watching, wolf kills were beneficial to other carnivores in the park, including grizzlies which are making a comeback too. So, not everything is wasted.

They've reintroduced Elk into southeastern KY a few years ago and now more are becoming a nuisance by getting hit by cars, killing and injuring people. I don't know what the answer is but it's a shame that we have to eliminate every other animal on the planet so we can live without any interference.

Mush, you said it better than I could. I agree with you.

Yet in Roosevelt National Park, the elk are destroying everything. They cannot be killed and transported out of the state because of the wasting brain disease. Yes wolves do kill, so do coyotes, and mountain lions, but because some(and only a very few)people allow their livestock to take over some of the habitats where deer, elk etc live, it is upsetting the balance of nature. Wolves, like the other predatory animals have lost some of fear of man, so therefore are not afraid to come into our area. We have wolves here in ND, but not many. We have lions, open season, yet only 5 have been killed this year, and yes they take a calf or so. We need to put things in perspective and allow the ranchers to maintain a balance, even if it is necessary to kill some of the predators. Or the deer, elk will take over and then the livestock will suffer as is happening right now it many of the National Parks.
Another thing to think about is when a person finds a kill, was it done by a wolf, lion, poacher, or a pack of wild dogs. If you are a rancher/farmer/rural owner, how many times do you find a dog dumped near your home. These dogs cross breed with coyotes and believe me a coyote/dog/wolf mixture is many times more dangerous that a non mix. I know because my DD had one and had to have it put down because it reverted back and became very dangerous.

Why can't the elk be killed Marie?
Especially if they are carrying the disease?

Brucellosis is the disease of the decade in Wyoming. Cattle can be vaccinated from the disease but elk and bison cannot. Between the wolves and the brucellosis the elk herd at the Jackson Feedground has been eliminated by two thirds.

I've hard of dogs mating with coyotes and wolves but I've never seen one that could be identified as part wolf. I'd be afraid of a dog like that simply because it isn't bred to be friendly and people loving. A nieighbor a long time ago had a ill mannered, big, mean dog he claimed was part wolf. I thought it was just an excuse for not being able to control his dog.
LOL

Lori

Grazing is not allowed in Yellowstone. Because of the threat of brucellosis, animals that wander out of the park are often slaughtered. The surrounding states could lose the ability to ship their stock out of state if they mingle with bison. No rancher would take the chance of his stock getting sick.
I don't know the numbers for the other states, but Idaho now has over 800 from the release of 6 wolves just 10 years ago. They have been seen in the Boise foothills, several times, and have now also been seen in Oregon and Washington. They do kill for the sake of killing. No doubt about that, and it was an experiment that came with good intentions, but has been disasterous for wolves and ranchers alike. I was lucky enough to see one of the first wolves brought back to Yellowstone, as at the time we lived just outside the park. We have moved to the otherside of the state, and not many times last year, did we not encounter them when we were fishing or camping. Someone smarter than me, is going to have to decide how to deal with a problem that was forced onto the parks and residents, that have to contend with them. Now to compound problems there is talk of importing more grizzlies into the Idaho/Montana/Washington areas. What are people thinking? These are not zoo's. Wild animals behave as nature intended. There are many more people that live work and recreate in these areas, and it is going to be a death sentence for the bears, as it now is for the wolves.

Cathyid - You're right, grazing is not allowed in the park. I think that some people became confused when reading that there are cattle throughout the Yellowstone Ecosystem - but the Ecosystem comprises sizable parts of Idaho, Montana, even Utah, as well as Wyoming east and south of the park. And I agree with you about the madness of introducing more grizzlies into the area. Bad for people, bad for the bears.

Lori - I didn't know that brucellosis attacked elk as well as bison. Am so sorry to hear that the great elk herd has been so reduced in size!

This has been a very informative and enlightening post, thank you all. Lori- I think you made some excellent points and your point of view is great to get, as a cattle rancher.

There seems to be some kind of mystique about wolves that so many people just love them and honor them, but I tend to see them as animals high up on the food chain that will (and must) kill to eat and survive, no matter what. When a child gets killed by a wolf, perhaps the love affair will dwindle. Although- look at CA and the mountain lion. As many attacks on humans that they have had (not just in CA but even in Canada) they are still honored and protected. Once they figure out that they are safe from most humans, the fear is gone and they get bolder. That's probably going to happen with wolves, too.

JMHO, and I don't have time to state this as elequently as most of you have, I have to leave for work. Shoot! I hope you all figure this out for us. :)