Replies

"Wildlife officials like to say that understanding the science behind an environmental problem and finding a solution to it are the simple parts."

So what problem would the re-introductiion of the wolf solve? It seems to me that the established environmental fact is that the habitat does not support the wolf or it would be there.....

So what problem would the re-introductiion of the wolf solve?

The problem of having yet another tool to use for land control purposes.

Also sentimental city types who aquire their understanding of nature from the discovery channel get to feel all warm and fuzzy.

"You see pictures of (wolves) looking all pretty in the winter, but you don't see pictures of what they do," says Cortney Fornengo, 19.

Allegedly do, Miss Fornengo. Nowhere in this article did it EVER say "I SAW THE BIG BAD WOLF DO THIS OR THAT"...

EVERYONE knows it's the saucer people who do the cow mutilations... 'cause I ain't buying the argument that those wiley wolves are eating the ENTIRE calf, especially to the point they are completely gone and nothing provided to the guvment for compensation. The wolves would look like gorged Puffins..

All kidding aside, National Geographic had a tape on the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone, and you can actually see the difference between a puny coyote (which was the top of the food chain) and a pack of wolves.

Yes, they do roam, without concern for "Park Boundries". And the cattlemen are just as pissed at wolves as they are with the damn bison that spread disease. BUT IN THE BIG PICTURE, only the wolves can take down an elk.

Not sure if the deer population in Minnisota or Wisconsin is spreading to the point where the wolves are needed. It's not like they can allow people with GUNS to take care of things. I believe it's more of a sickness/age thing, where the wolves take out the elderly/infirmed in the South Park Manner: You know, "Thin out their numbers"..