Posted on 02/01/2008 7:45:31 PM PST by Bruce 22-250
Warning graphic pictures of animals killed by wolves. Here is the truth with what living with wolves is really like. If you have a weak stomach don't view some very brutal pictures.
As for Tigers, Lions and Cheetahs, maybe you should get the opinions of those who live with them everyday. You know the ones i;m talking about. The one’s who’ve lost children and relatives to their attacks.
Thanks.
The old article was from November 22, 2002.
The wolves have killed many more elk, deer...since then and their numbers are way up.
Hopefully, the USFWS and the state DOW’s will return to the original promised wolf numbers. They will not volunteer to keep their promises, but the voters might force the issue somewhat.
Even that is not likely.
I hope that you and others get wolf tags.
I live near vehicles that people die in by the thousands but I don’t want them extinct.
I’m sure I’d hate tigers if my kid got killed by one, but not everyone loses their kids to tigers either. Thankfully. Otherwise we’d have no animals. At least not carnivores.
"When they start attacking, killing and eating people, you might.
"
So as long as it’s not your kid, to hell with everybody else's.
"
" "I don’t see that as a problem. We are the carnivores, we are the ultimate predators. There's nothing they provide or do, that we can’t do ourselves."
Everybody else’s? How many children are killed by wolves, tigers, lions and bears all over the world evey year?
Seems to be quite a price to have several species extinct in return.
And no humans can’t do the job of these entire ecosystems. These animals eat small rats, rabbits, and all kinds of animals.
Excellent point :
The ranch where those pictures were taken is close to going under.
What is the guy suppose to do?
After the family places that were homesteaded in the 1800’s go broke...Ted Turner and friends can buy them cheap to build a large eco-lodge for their Hollywood friends...
So much for free range beef as our food supply will be feed lot only soon.
Lots of growth hormones and other drugs...
And the family ?
Liberals hate middle class, working families ?
Thanks George great link on coyote attacking people.
The issue here is why should people move. The wolves were shove down their throats by city people who watch too much TV. You don’t just move a ranch the wolves were move in on the ranchers. So if the wolves are so important to you people why don’t you pay the ranchers for their loses? Put your money where your mouth is.
A peer review study in Idaho found ranchers were only being paid for 1 out 7 loses from wolves. Who paid for the other 6 the rancher did. These kind of loses never happen until the wolves were brought into the eco-system. So if you think wolves are great then pay for them instead of forcing the ranchers to pay for your wishes.
The eco-nuts say that they pay ranchers for their losses. The eco’s know that this is a big lie as they say this garbage as “ pr “ coverage for their liberal media friends to repeat.
One big scam : the media loves to quote these prepared lies.
Their second goal is to bankrupt working ranchers so that the homesteads can be taken over for wilderness. Wolves, ESA... help in this agenda.
Federal authorities were forced to cut off water to 1,500 farms in Oregon’s and California’s Klamath Basin in April because of the “endangered” sucker fish.
The environmental groups behind the cutoff continue to declare that they are simply concerned for the welfare of a bottom-feeder.
But last month, those environmentalists revealed another motive when they submitted a polished proposal for the government to buy out the farmers and move them off their land.
This is what’s really happening in Klamath—call it rural cleansing...
The strategy of these environmental groups is nearly always the same: to sue or lobby the government into declaring rural areas off-limits to people who live and work there. The tools for doing this include the Endangered Species Act and local preservation laws, most of which are so loosely crafted as to allow a wide leeway in their implementation.
In some cases owners lose their property outright. More often, the environmentalists’ goal is to have restrictions placed on the land that either render it unusable or persuade owners to leave of their own accord.
http://www.keepourrights.org/wallstjour.htm
But thats some where else, so i’m sure you don’t care.
>>>>>No, it’s just that I don’t have a knee-jerk reaction to wild animals doing what wild animals do.
And this is something that occurs right here at home, NOT somewhere else:
U.S. Fatalities From Motor Vehicle Crashes in 2006 Reach a Five-Year Low
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has released a preview of its “2006 Annual Assessment of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatalities and Injuries” that indicates the number of people killed in the United States in motor vehicle traffic crashes has declined significantly from 2005.
By Catherine Radwan
According to the preview assessment, motor vehicle traffic fatalities for passenger car occupants, light-truck occupants, pedestrians and pedalcyclists declined from 43,510 in 2005 to 42,642 in 2006, the lowest level in five years. The decline is the largest both in number of deaths and percentage since 1992.
However, motorcycle rider fatalities continued a nine-year rise to 4,810 in 2006. Motorcycle rider fatalities now account for 11 percent of total fatalities, and exceed pedestrian fatalities for the first time since NHTSA began collecting motor vehicle crash fatality data in 1975.
The report notes that passenger car fatalities have dropped for the fourth year in a row. The decline in light-truck occupant fatalities was the first since 1992.
Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia showed fewer overall fatalities in 2006 than in 2005. Missouri achieved the largest decline in fatalities at 13 percent.
Fatalities in alcohol-related crashes in 2006 did not change significantly from 2005.
The Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatality Rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (MVT) also dropped to 1.42, the lowest rate recorded by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
Another significant finding reveals that the estimate of the number of persons injured in motor vehicle traffic crashes has declined for the seventh year in a row. In 2006, nearly 2.6 million people were injured compared to 2.7 million in 2005. Also, the number of people injured declined in all categories except for motorcycle riders.
NHTSA’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) is a census of all crashes of motor vehicles traveling on public roadways in which a person died within 30 days of the crash.
Additional details from the “2006 Annual Assessment of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatalities and Injuries” report will be available later this year.
Oh, and I have perspective.
Bigger fish to fry.
And that’s a 5 year LOW.
In fact this kind of reminds me of the loons saying SUV’s killed so many people a year, therefore SUV’s are BAAAD and should be BANNED!
Yup...as I said when a liberal loon is involved it’s NOT about the wolves...they’re just hijacking them to satisfy their nutty agenda.
No knee jerk here! I know exactly what wild animals are capable of. As a matter of fact, thats what i’ve been talking about and you’ve been trying to ignore. Bears, Wolves, Mountain Lions, given the opportunity will kill you and eat you. They can devastate livestock and wipe out native species if not held in check. If you wish to continue this discussion please attempt to stay on subject.
Nope...and then I made a point there’s ALOT more pressing urgencies than the 500 or so victims of wild animals to the tune of some 50,000 in a GOOD year on our roads, 100 times more pressing in fact; but (MOST) people aren’t looking to eradicate all motor vehicles just because they’re dangerous.
Control is a good thing, but calling for the extinction of any of God’s creatures is not a healthy point of view.
*******************
It's unbelievable! /sarc
"Chlanna nan con thigibh a so's gheibh sibh feoil"
I made a point
No, you changed the subject.
Tell that to those that have lost love ones to animal attacks.
No I didn’t I put it into perspective.
And for that matter, pit bulls are more in the news than wolves. FAR more dangerous because they actually LIVE with kids!
If you didn’t like my opinions on Wolves, your sure not going to like my opinions of Pit-Bulls. Now, can we please get back on the subject of wolves, or are you just going to give up on that one.
No wolves and pit bulls are very different. Funny thing PETA’s position on pits is to no longer allow breeding them, the one time I think I actually agree with them!
But I don’t blame the dogs, they’ve been bred to fight and kill...and sure some live out full lives with no incident but as a breed they too often snap for no apparent reason and either injure or kill someone.
It’s very different, but equally as deadly to kids/humans, etc. which is the point...again, more worrisome and deadly but more insidious IMO.
I do feel for ranchers and livestock and see the need to hunt the wolves, just not the point to extinction.
Let’s just say we have a different opinion on wolves and wild animals but the same on pit bulls!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.