ishawooa's question->
"I would like to hear your opinion concerning the hundred years or so following the systematic and purposeful process to totally eliminate the gray wolf from the western United States"
"This same time span demonstrated a tremendous growth in numbers of all known herds of big game"
-I agree, though more big game is not necessarily a good thing. (see post above)
"Never did they reach the point beyond what the forests and plains could support as far as I can determine"
-On this point I respectfully disagree, again see post above.
"Certainly conservation was improved during this period, game and fish regulations developed and enforced"
-again, I agree
"as well as other efforts to assist the survival of the varied wildlife of the region"
-Herein lies another problem. You see, it is easy to demonize the wolves because they kill calves and reduce survival rates. The thing is, this is how things are supposed to work, its a good thing, NOT a bad thing.
The shape and size of the elk population is supposed to be determined by natural selection. Cows/claves that aren't smart or fast enough to evade the predators are SUPPOSED to die. This is how the genetic makeup of the herd is determined. Over large time spans this will dramatically change the genetic makeup of the herd.
Instead of the worst individuals being removed from the gene pool, hunters often remove the best individuals. Granted, the effects will be subtle at fist, but if we are talking about long term policies we honestly have to worry that by decreasing predation and increasing hunting we are destroying the genetic health of the species. This goes for many other species like whitetails and mule deer too.
"I would like to hear your opinion concerning the hundred years or so following the systematic and purposeful process to totally eliminate the gray wolf from the western United States"
"This same time span demonstrated a tremendous growth in numbers of all known herds of big game"
-I agree, though more big game is not necessarily a good thing. (see post above)
"Never did they reach the point beyond what the forests and plains could support as far as I can determine"
-On this point I respectfully disagree, again see post above.
"Certainly conservation was improved during this period, game and fish regulations developed and enforced"
-again, I agree
"as well as other efforts to assist the survival of the varied wildlife of the region"
-Herein lies another problem. You see, it is easy to demonize the wolves because they kill calves and reduce survival rates. The thing is, this is how things are supposed to work, its a good thing, NOT a bad thing.
The shape and size of the elk population is supposed to be determined by natural selection. Cows/claves that aren't smart or fast enough to evade the predators are SUPPOSED to die. This is how the genetic makeup of the herd is determined. Over large time spans this will dramatically change the genetic makeup of the herd.
Instead of the worst individuals being removed from the gene pool, hunters often remove the best individuals. Granted, the effects will be subtle at fist, but if we are talking about long term policies we honestly have to worry that by decreasing predation and increasing hunting we are destroying the genetic health of the species. This goes for many other species like whitetails and mule deer too.
Comment