“Beloved” Wolf Killed Outside Yellowstone

[ramont]

The only real-world way to fight fire is with fire and water. The trick is knowing which to use, and when to use it.

Yup, you can't win against the anti-hunters by giving in to their insane rants, we have to find a way to create a propaganda industry that's as powerful as theirs. The problem is that the so called press will always cover stories about the extreme fringe groups because it sells better, nobody wants to hear about the normal, average, every day stuff.

 

[Hoot]

I wonder how many people caught the BS that the rancher isn't compensated for cattle killed by wolves in Montana, we have a Livestock Loss Board and they do compensate for cattle killed by wolves.
A quote from their web site:

That rancher said he lives 100 miles south of Yellowstone, so Wyoming probably. Wyoming may not compensate for wolf damage due to adoption of the court rulings in their management plan. I have no direct knowledge, that's just how I read it...

 

[CorbLand]

That rancher said he lives 100 miles south of Yellowstone, so Wyoming probably. Wyoming may not compensate for wolf damage due to adoption of the court rulings in their management plan. I have no direct knowledge, that's just how I read it...

The rancher specifically states that he lives in Montana.

 

[slick]

The rancher specifically states that he lives in Montana.

Either the rancher is wrong, and doesn’t live 100mi south of Yellowstone. Or you’re wrong because it’s one of the first things he says.

 

[CorbLand]

Either the rancher is wrong, and doesn’t live 100mi south of Yellowstone. Or you’re wrong because it’s one of the first things he says.

I read the comment about the courts in Montana wrong. He does live in Wyoming.

 

[slick]

It’s all good. Just making sure we’re on the same page.

I’m not accusing you, because who knows? It could very well be that said fellow doesn’t actually raise livestock. He did say that they aren’t compensated, which is bologna.

 

[ramont]

I don't hate or love wolves, they are what they are, but I just wanted to make sure that the truth was put out there. As for the killing of that wolf, I see nothing important one way or the other, it was a legal taking of a game animal.

 

[5MilesBack]

The only real-world way to fight fire is with fire and water. The trick is knowing which to use, and when to use it.

Well, it's pretty easy......don't use the water until the fire has already consumed the idiocy. Unfortunately, it may be a long time before we can use the water.

I just saw on the noon news today, that PETA wants to ban the use of phrases such as "bringing home the bacon" and "taking he bull by the horns". THIS is the idiocy that we're up against. We either destroy it, or ignore it.........there's not much in between that will have any effect on these loons.

 

[Desk Jockey]

I could shoot a deer, cut it’s head off, strap it to the hood of my truck like horns on a Texas Cadillac, strap the body to the roof and drag the bloody gut pile from my bumper all the way from the trailhead to my house.

It would be legal. Full stop.

Keep leaning on that “it’s legal so to hell with the public perception / antihunter / tree hugger crowd” and it won’t be legal for long.

If they shit can the wolf hunts in Western states like they did with black bear in New Jersey and Brown Bear in BC and god knows what else, then a buffer zone around Yellowstone won’t have sounded like such a bad option but, by then, it will be too late.

 

[CorbLand]

It’s all good. Just making sure we’re on the same page.

I’m not accusing you, because who knows? It could very well be that said fellow doesn’t actually raise livestock. He did say that they aren’t compensated, which is bologna.

I went and read the comments on the news article. He says he lives in Wyoming but Wyoming is split into districts and some will compensate you. He doesn't live in one that does but he does have a shoot on sight permit.

how true any of that is, I couldnt tell you but thats what he claims.

 

[Squirrels]

I've held it long enough. I understand most everyone's thoughts and opinions on being careful and cautious with anti-types. Just because it is legal doesn't make it "right" or the best course of action. In modern judicial law it is not unlawful for a spouse to cheat (yes, i'm sure there are still laws in place that contradict my statement but they are old and no longer enforced. Just wanted to saw that so the first a$$hole that goes and post some old law just to prove me wrong). While not illegal for me to cheat on my spouse, it's not right and there would be major consequences if said act occured.

Now for those antis who love their little wolves and grizzlies. How about a proposal to them, will leave the wolves and grizzlies alone. But only if those who want them left alone are willing to let us relocate a half a dozen federally imprisoned convicts into their home. To live with them hand and hand. I'm not suggesting this, simply making a point.

Don't be afraid to ruffle feathers and establish some alphaism with people on occastion. There is legal, illegal, right, and wrong; all with grey areas. Regardless, don't be a puss. Form your own educated opinions and be willing to express it in a tactful way that shows you are unwavering.

 

[flatlanderhuffandpuff]

I could shoot a deer, cut it’s head off, strap it to the hood of my truck like horns on a Texas Cadillac, strap the body to the roof and drag the bloody gut pile from my bumper all the way from the trailhead to my house.

It would be legal. Full stop.

Keep leaning on that “it’s legal so to hell with the public perception / antihunter / tree hugger crowd” and it won’t be legal for long.

If they shit can the wolf hunts in Western states like they did with black bear in New Jersey and Brown Bear in BC and god knows what else, then a buffer zone around Yellowstone won’t have sounded like such a bad option but, by then, it will be too late.

If you drive around dragging a gut pile you'll probably be arrested for something I would think?

If we roll over and allow them to do buffer zones for specific animals we are agreeing that some animals are more important than others. This is a dangerous view to allow to exist unchallenged. If the anti crowd wants to make a scientific argument I'll listen to it happily. If they want to get on their soapbox and scream about a poor wolf that won't see its kids anymore, well, I won't listen.

When these types of articles are being put in the spotlight it gives us a unique opportunity to respond with a much more rational view. I don't hate wolves and have no interest in killing one right now. I want the wild areas to thrive and continue to offer opportunity for hunters to be an active part of the food chain. When we are allowing antis to try and push one species above another or remove people from the food chain they need to be countered hard.

 

[TexasCub]

This is the typical liberal stance, govern on Emotion! Beloved, unbeloved I don’t give a shit, let the liberals watch what I’ve seen with my own two eyes as far as the evil carnage that wolves are capable of (because they are wolves and that’s what wolves do) and then lets see what they say. This same shit went on in Alaska with packs that ran in and out of Denali. Humanizing an apex predator is just stupid. Do we need wolves....sure. Do we need to kill a bunch of wolves....absolutely! It’s all part of the balance, and unfortunately the liberals and the govt aren’t going to do it that’s why there are seasons. The more they allow emotion to interfere with balancing the food and the predators the less likely balance will be met.

 

[JWP58]

I could shoot a deer, cut it’s head off, strap it to the hood of my truck like horns on a Texas Cadillac, strap the body to the roof and drag the bloody gut pile from my bumper all the way from the trailhead to my house.

It would be legal. Full stop.

Keep leaning on that “it’s legal so to hell with the public perception / antihunter / tree hugger crowd” and it won’t be legal for long.

If they shit can the wolf hunts in Western states like they did with black bear in New Jersey and Brown Bear in BC and god knows what else, then a buffer zone around Yellowstone won’t have sounded like such a bad option but, by then, it will be too late.

I dont advocate being confrontational, however I refuse to apologize for something that was legal and nowhere near as crazy as your bizarre example. Did the wolf get dragged through town? Was it hacked up in front of a crowd?

Reality check, if they can shit can the wolf hunts like the New Jersey bear hunts, they will. No matter how nice you are to them. They dont like people killing their "friends".

 

[Fatcamp]

I could shoot a deer, cut it’s head off, strap it to the hood of my truck like horns on a Texas Cadillac, strap the body to the roof and drag the bloody gut pile from my bumper all the way from the trailhead to my house.

It would be legal. Full stop.

Keep leaning on that “it’s legal so to hell with the public perception / antihunter / tree hugger crowd” and it won’t be legal for long.

If they shit can the wolf hunts in Western states like they did with black bear in New Jersey and Brown Bear in BC and god knows what else, then a buffer zone around Yellowstone won’t have sounded like such a bad option but, by then, it will be too late.

I think that what should probably be a priority is establishing a buffer zone for the buffer zone of the buffer zone. That'll fix it.

 

[Gumbo]

It's unfortunate that people put the grizzlies and wolves on a pedestal. Naming them.

Hunters name animals all the time.

 

[Billinsd]

I think that what should probably be a priority is establishing a buffer zone for the buffer zone of the buffer zone. That'll fix it.

Then another buffer zone.

 

[Billinsd]

Hunters name animals all the time.

I don't name wild animals, however, I don't "harvest" animals either, I hunt, shoot and kill them.

 

[Billinsd]

I dont advocate being confrontational, however I refuse to apologize for something that was legal and nowhere near as crazy as your bizarre example. Did the wolf get dragged through town? Was it hacked up in front of a crowd?

Reality check, if they can shit can the wolf hunts like the New Jersey bear hunts, they will. No matter how nice you are to them. They dont like people killing their "friends".

Yep... NEVER apologize or try and appease them!! Always be polite, and on your very best behavior. Never get mad, never show anger, and always be in control of yourself.

 

[Kevin Dill]

Moving on from the actual killing of the wolf...

What seems to work so well for the anti-hunters and ARAs is their never-ending energy and willingness to take their offensive (remember that word) to the most effective media sources. I'll give them credit: they may be crazy but they're damned good at pushing their views into mainstream USA. I personally think they're doing a better job of advancing (another word to remember) their cause than we are of defending ours. They're bringing the war to us and to mainstream USA. We're more often playing defense than anything, mainly because we just want to be left alone. At least that's how I view it.

What seems to be missing on our side is an offensive game plan designed to continually hammer back hard at the ARA crowd. If we had as much maniacal energy as they do, we'd be exploiting every piece of their illogical behaviors AND we'd be aggressively advancing our own beliefs. The key to this war is winning the minds of mainstream USA. I don't think we'll get there with a public face of "Go-to-hell....I have a right to hunt!" We DO have the right to hunt, but those rights are getting more and more eroded as public sentiment questions the need to kill certain animals in certain places. What seems missing to me is a 2-pronged approach in which we basically play defense-through-offense, and we logically, tirelessly and steadily advance our causes in ways which make sense and gain the support of those who don't hunt but DO have a say in whether (or not) we keep hunting.

I think the bottom line is winning. One principle is to look at what your enemies are doing and then do it better than them. We're falling short in that regard I believe.