"How wolves change rivers video"....?!

Lr1000 said:
If you actually believe there is not to many wolves in the south I believe you are very uneducated. I would love to see you spew ur rants in a room full of ranchers and hunters. These days in the lower 400 zones you are more likely to call in a wolf or a cat will a elk call. Ranchers are loosing tens of thousands of dollars in lost calves. You can call me uneducated in the issue that's fine but maybe get out of your basement, stop reading the theory and see what's happening to more then just the poor wolves.
Click to expand...

I'm a hell of a lot closer to the centre of the argument and more involved than you could suspect, I'm looking at wolves more days of the month than not. How about yourself? The rest of this is said with a warm tone, though text makes it hard to convey that. I expect you’re a bright fellow and also expect you haven’t been exposed to the information, or developed the patience to absorb it. Now forgive me, admittedly you struck a nerve by suggesting I get out of the basement, so I’m going to ask you some questions in return to see how far out of the basement you are yourself, and respond to your assertion from my own position.

As it sounds you do, we also have had a lot of livestock in Alberta, and I still own and lease out a couple properties in the foothills. How many head do you have and where is the land? We have land in 312. People were accustomed to zero predation, and it's returning, humans are the problem there. You can't put meat in a pasture and expect zero losses like the past, unfortunately people became accustomed to that. Now shoot me some referenced predation numbers for the 400's for last year and prove your point on. Members of this forum and coworkers are actively engaged in the aerial tracking, counts, and culls, which is currently running in Alberta around Grande Cache, and now we're starting in BC. Finally, we're talking about bloody Yellowstone and the importance and effects of the reintroduction there from a population of zero; how many cattle are in Yellowstone? These are two different arguments, the health of a park, and the health of livestock where the ecosystem is already destroyed. Every time the good side of wolves is brought up it degenerates into hearsay and predation accusations far from the area the topic is on. It is beyond ridiculous people with near zero practical experience feel qualified to weigh in so staunchly after watching a five minute video, that they decide offends their ideas.

The real issues are more closely related to our love of unsustainable red meat, and the subjugation of wilds to produce it. Yep, the ignorant will turn their heads at this line and balk. I spend a lot of time in Africa and the same thing is happening there at a pace you can barely put into words, the land is utterly destroyed once the cattle take over and pummel it into oblivion. They are poisoning and shooting lions, hyenas, wild dogs, leopards, and cheetahs there too with the same aggravated complaints of livestock losses. I hunted a satellite male lion in the Kalahari last year that had moved to an operation he wasn't supposed to be in, and he was tearing through valuable game animals. Before that I was slated to hunt outside Etosha National Park to push a pride back to the park, they ended up being poisoned before I arrived. These areas are fenced these days, even the parks much of the time, in enormous patches, and do you know what the primary concern is in the Kalahari? It's not keeping the game in, it's keeping the humans and livestock out.

I hunt. I actively kill wolves. And I studied this exact subject way back in university for the grand total of one week, of one class. The science was as compelling then, and as directly correlated, as now. And because of this and the reading this spurred me to since I have a deep appreciation for a proper population of apex predators, now I've said time and again I'm all for wolf management, and other predators clearly too; I've hunted lion, grizzly, wolves, and more. I've worked in the Amazon and seen a jaguar... in a cage. It was an orphan who's mother was killed by farmers who burn the forest to raise a few starving cattle and some root vegetables of near nil nutrition, and talked to mad ranchers. The overwhelming trend I've seen from the Amazon, to Alberta and BC, to Africa is humans are the problem. We're all human and clearly don't advocate human culls, and few seem to see a problem with steak, roast, ribs, or burgers every week. We find a convenient vent in the predators for the frustration, and unfortunately the predators are just being predators, there is nothing intrinsically evil and nefarious about them; it's just survival.

Sadly hunters have wholesale adopted the mindset anything in favour of apex predators is bull####. I’d rather have a full ecosystem to hunt even if it means less elk. I’d also rather have managed wolf populations where necessary than the localized extinctions of woodland caribou, as is happening where I fly helicopters here in northern BC. I’m about to lift off, and I’m sure I’ll see wolves, or at least hoards sign. In one valley last year I watched wolves kill a dozen wood bison in two weeks, that’s excessive, we agree there and the cull is actively going to focus in this region. So to summarize a winding narrative, I am a hunter, I am a conservationist. And I’m all for apex predators and their sensible management. I also see their benefits and believe solid research on improvements to the environments they inhabit and don’t brush it away as hogwash from radicals. You CAN be a hunter and understand all those things, being an outdoorsman does not mean you have to exude ignorance of wolves and any of the benefits they bring. My principle problem with how things are presented on wolves amongst hunters is the “brick wall” mentality where individuals choose to see an issue only one way, without compromise. That is a mark of an individual with little mental capacity to consider problems. I don’t believe anyone here is that guy, so why the #### do so many choose to act like it?

Here's the proverbial two sides of the fence, a photo my wife took in Africa last year. The green side has natural species, including lions and hyenas. Guess what's on the other side? The same story exists anywhere there are apex predators.



shotgun12G said:
Oh Really! The wolves changed the rivers!!!
I guess the change has nothing to do with the forest recovering from the fire of 1988! Sure, the few dozen wolves save a bit of vegetation by equalizing the deer (read elk) population, however the loss of the vegetation is what contributed to the erosion of the hillsides and rivers. The forest is now recovering and so is the vegetation and everything related to the balance of the ecosystem.

I am not against the wolves in any way. They are a vital contribution to the natural balance of the park. The logic of the video just escapes me.
Click to expand...

1988 was well over a quarter century ago. Bank foliage grows and rebounds by the season, try mowing a sheet of plywood sized patch on a stream bank one fall and see what you have the next. People routinely plant stabilizing vegetation on steep slopes after new construction, the effect is seen in weeks. The willingness folks have to expunge opinions on gut feel in here is embarrassing.
 
Ardent said:
Sadly hunters have wholesale adopted the mindset anything in favour of apex predators is bull####. I’d rather have a full ecosystem to hunt even if it means less elk. I’d also rather have managed wolf populations where necessary than the localized extinctions of woodland caribou, as is happening where I fly helicopters here in northern BC. I’m about to lift off, and I’m sure I’ll see wolves, or at least hoards sign. In one valley last year I watched wolves kill a dozen wood bison in two weeks, that’s excessive, we agree there and the cull is actively going to focus in this region. So to summarize a winding narrative, I am a hunter, I am a conservationist. And I’m all for apex predators and their sensible management. I also see their benefits and believe solid research on improvements to the environments they inhabit and don’t brush it away as hogwash from radicals. You CAN be a hunter and understand all those things, being an outdoorsman does not mean you have to exude ignorance of wolves and any of the benefits they bring. My principle problem with how things are presented on wolves amongst hunters is the “brick wall” mentality where individuals choose to see an issue only one way, without compromise. That is a mark of an individual with little mental capacity to consider problems. I don’t believe anyone here is that guy, so why the #### do so many choose to act like it?
Click to expand...

Probably one of the better bits of commentary I have seen here in some time. Well said.
 
Lr1000 said:
If you actually believe there is not to many wolves in the south I believe you are very uneducated. I would love to see you spew ur rants in a room full of ranchers and hunters. These days in the lower 400 zones you are more likely to call in a wolf or a cat will a elk call. Ranchers are loosing tens of thousands of dollars in lost calves. You can call me uneducated in the issue that's fine but maybe get out of your basement, stop reading the theory and see what's happening to more then just the poor wolves.
Click to expand...

Are there no tools available to the ranchers to control the predator population? I'm pretty sure they can shoot and/or trap wolves in protection of their livestock, can they not? The "nanny state" mentality of many farmers is really getting out of hand in recent years.
 
bearkilr said:
I should have specified "most" conservationists, not all, and this is especially true when it comes to wolves. For some reason they're held to a higher standard than other predators, probably due to their social structure and humans having a history of eradicating them.
Click to expand...

I guess I just object to the term 'conservationist' being hijacked by people who are better described as eco-terrorists, the kind that oppose all hunting, and reject the very idea of human involvement in wildlife management. Those people are as far removed from the fundamental tenets of wildlife conservation as one can imagine.
 
In the same post you state predators are predators there is nothing evil or nefarious about them, it's just survival. Then in the next paragraph you state you watched a pack kill a dozen bison in two weeks. This just shows Wolves will kill more then what is needed to servive.

As for where do I own or lease land. I personally don't. So I will get a really good friend max158 to chime in on cattle loss and his problems as a rancher in bobs creek.
 
Lr1000 said:
In the same post you state predators are predators there is nothing evil or nefarious about them, it's just survival. Then in the next paragraph you state you watched a pack kill a dozen bison in two weeks. This just shows Wolves will kill more then what is needed to servive.

As for where do I own or lease land. I personally don't. So I will get a really good friend max158 to chime in on cattle loss and his problems as a rancher in bobs creek.
Click to expand...

I'm becoming concerned you only absorb what you want to see. So what else do I say in that same body of text, even likely the same paragraph, about management of predators? Your friend ranches in Yellowstone as well it seems, eh? So are you and I no different than a guy fighting for ISIS/L in Iraq? We're all human, right? Also in that same text which it seems you overlooked was a statement saying it is with great frustration I see the attitude on wolves being applied unilaterally, the "brick wall" mentality I mentioned. No issue is clear cut, especially this one, and as I also mentioned and you missed I support, engage in, and understand the killing of wolves and other predators where necessary. This thread, like all wolf threads, is going woefully off topic with many inaccurate interpretations and selective attention in a direction far from the original subject, of the benefits to streams of wolves repopulating former territory. It's as if many folks don't have the capacity to compute this issue isn't black and white, it's full colour and varies from here to Mexico. Forgive any errors I'm sitting in a hole in the bush on a smartphone.

Look forward to your friend's take; even if it's completely off the subject of wolves on wild land and the benefits to streams and ecology. Over coffee in Fort Nelson we'd probably have a great chat, here we're at odds and frustrated by one another and accusing each other of being in figurative basements. Ain't the internet grande.
 
Lots of good info in the thread. One thing i did not encounter though is the topic of litters of apex predators. Predators can breed up very quickly as compared to herbivores that have one or sometimes two per year.

Predator hunting here is usually in the coldest and snowy months. Most of us are watching TV. Only a few hunt predators, and it is not easy. They are crafty, learn and adapt quickly. Often the inexperienced young are the ones taken, some of which would not make the winter or prey on domestic animals...including dogs and cats.

Predator hunting can help equalize local overpopulations of predators, keeping herbivore populations more constant and at the same time teach fear of man to the predators.
 
I see I hit the same nerve with my basement comment as you did with your embarrassing uneducated comment.

As for my education on the issue. No I have not taken courses on predators and there derect impact on the ecosystem. However although a maybe some what biased view on the subject of Wolves I wouldn't say I'm uneducated on the topic. My eduction comes formy years of in the field hunting ubserving them and the impact the increasing growth of wolves have had an impact on other wildlife. Listening to farmers and ranchers from Waterton north to slave lake. Talking to biologists that have studied there inpact on our wildlife from the Yellowstone north to jasper and it impact they have had on our elk herds. No I have not made it my career to study and deal with the animal, however I do have some backing to my knowledge.

I do not hate wolves I think they are a amazing creature and are a vital part to our ecosystem. What I am sick of is people with bleading hearts starting petitions to stop culls on wolves where there are big issues, and blaming it on hunters like in bc with the caribou. Or the way esrd is doing major changes to our regulations, cutting back on hunting opportunity and are not responding to any questions on why they are doing nothing about predator control in these areas. Even if you don't believe it's a issue from the clear water south to Waterton. The fact is there are more grizz then the government wants to admit, Cougars are not being controlled in some of these hard to get to areas and wolfs are running rapid in these areas also. It's not just wolves I believe should be targeted here I think all three of the predators need to be brought back into check.

As for why don't ranchers just do something about it themselves. Wolves are not the easiest animal to trap or hunt. You need a trapper that really knows what he is doing and hunting takes lots of time and commitment. It's not as easy as hunting coyotes and most don't have the time.
 
Ardent said:
It's probaly clear but I should have mentioned for the general thread the ungulates of course would prefer to stay near the water, and lush vegetation. They eat and trample the vegatation on the stream bank, and cause erosion of the banks which introduces sediment, and widens the stream both making it shallower and wider, neither of which are good for fish. The foliage rebounded with the reintroduction of Wolves as they flocked to the streams to hunt, the banks became more stable again, and cover increased, which also reduced the severity of storm runoff that was destroying life in the streams as well. I could go on a long time but there's better info out there than I can share, via google.
Click to expand...

Do not forget that at about the time the wolves were being reintroduced that a good part of Yellowstone underwent a great change with fire. This has more impact on the park than any other event. Could it be that the wolves are getting credit for the fires enhancement?
 
As a rancher north of the old man the lack of hunting and trapping of Wolves has been devastating to cattle elk and deer populations in the foothills, 20 calves missing 2 cows in since dec confirmed kills in case your wondering, i hunt on my ranch and public land we have gone from herds of 5000 elk to last year west of highway 22 seeing maybe 20 elk one herd of 10 and a couple Bulls.

I have watched the disparence of elk in the foothills and it's only going to get worse esrd has no control of the wolf and grizzley population.

Have you seen the water sheds one the Rockies? Being and ex hello pilot and fighting fires in the Rockies I thjnk clear cutting would be a lot more detramental than the non existent elk population for being slaughtered by wolves!!

There is another video out there of 196 batcheler herd of elk in the states being wiped out by wolves all of them barley ate and left to rot

I hope you like the taste of coyote cause unless esrd gets there heads out of there asses and gets some predator control that all we will be hunting in 10 years
 
max158 said:
As a rancher north of the old man the lack of hunting and trapping of Wolves has been devastating to cattle elk and deer populations in the foothills, 20 calves missing 2 cows in since dec confirmed kills in case your wondering, i hunt on my ranch and public land we have gone from herds of 5000 elk to last year west of highway 22 seeing maybe 20 elk one herd of 10 and a couple Bulls.

I have watched the disparence of elk in the foothills and it's only going to get worse esrd has no control of the wolf and grizzley population.

Have you seen the water sheds one the Rockies? Being and ex hello pilot and fighting fires in the Rockies I thjnk clear cutting would be a lot more detramental than the non existent elk population for being slaughtered by wolves!!

There is another video out there of 196 batcheler herd of elk in the states being wiped out by wolves all of them barley ate and left to rot

I hope you like the taste of coyote cause unless esrd gets there heads out of there asses and gets some predator control that all we will be hunting in 10 years
Click to expand...

I'm a heli pilot as well, and have done a good deal of flying on the east side of the rockies, we lived in Grande Cache for awhile. The wolf culls are going strong there, and are justfied. The priniciple drivers for the wolves success in much of Canada are climate change, with more melts midwinter that refreeze into crusted snow, and oil and gas seismic lines, roads, and pipelines that allow long unnatural sight lanes for wolves to hunt. The crusted snow conditions from thaws and refreezes are especially hard on large animals as they break through and labour through the crust, while the wolves run on top fast as dry summer, seen it many times. We have one of those thaw and freeze events happening right now in Northern BC here, and there are wolf tracks running wood bison and woodland caribou all over the place, the moose are grouped up by the half dozen too. As well, though nobody likes to hear it and my family's own complete living has been farming going back a century, livestock are a problem too and lets not forget they aren't native, anywhere. We feed wolves and increase their numbers with livestock, then pressure them away from the stock and where do they go? After the wild animals, and you can't blame them. I advocate and participate actively in wolf management in Canada, where necessary. However the unfortunate and very misguided attitude many hunters seem to adopt wholesale is that wolves do NO good, anywhere, which of course is extremely far from the truth. These huge elk herds we're used to in much of the foothills are actually above historical, prehuman development levels, a surprise to many. We've just become used to it, and Yellowstone had the same extreme imbalance prior to the wolves. My point in this winding narrative is the considerations are complex, and to deny wolves do any good is embarrassing ignorance- you don't appear to make that argument. As in every issue it varies by the region, and particulars, and wolves are better than no wolves, and managed and balanced populations are better yet.
 
dgl1948 said:
Do not forget that at about the time the wolves were being reintroduced that a good part of Yellowstone underwent a great change with fire. This has more impact on the park than any other event. Could it be that the wolves are getting credit for the fires enhancement?
Click to expand...

I was asked this question earlier in the thread, and while runoff would have increased from the burn area, it actually subsides extremely quickly as the low, thick, fast growing foliage suddenly receiving sunlight slows runoff very quickly. In a burn area the low scrub quickly forms a "sponge" as it receives light under the burnt canopy, decaying trees and burn material further slow runoff, you know what I mean if you think of rotting wood and its water content. More than a quarter century later the effects are long, long remedied. They didn't just make an assumption in the research, they also ran trail cams and counts along the streams, and as the ungulate presence on the streams moved away there was an immediate and corresponding improvement in the stream health with the rebound of streamside vegetation. Even if folks only read the National Geographic surface scratcher and not the journals, they should read it before making staunch arguments here against wolves, it's truly fascinating material. Your question was a good one, thanks for the opportunity to elborate.

Ardent said:
1988 was well over a quarter century ago. Bank foliage grows and rebounds by the season, try mowing a sheet of plywood sized patch on a stream bank one fall and see what you have the next. People routinely plant stabilizing vegetation on steep slopes after new construction, the effect is seen in weeks. The willingness folks have to expunge opinions on gut feel in here is embarrassing.
Click to expand...
 
These huge elk herds we're used to in much of the foothills are actually above historical, prehuman development levels, a surprise to many
Click to expand...

Are you sure? Elk were a prairie animal. With the settlement of the land their habits were forced to change. Fur records indicated that huge numbers of elk hides (Manitoban) were traded. No one really knows what the population numbers were.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom