Aerial wolf hunting?

[dt3]

YouTube - Full Metal Jacket- Get Some

 

[Thornless]

I think they should go out tracking and tagging the animals first to gauge how many there really are before thinning out populations.

 

[MoonOwl]

I too think it's a lazy way to hunt. But we've become a lazy society.

 

[Tim]

Here is a good article from the National Audubon Society that I recently read while in a doctors office...

Audubon Magazine

It talks about the motives behind the culling of wolves and bears and that it isn't based on good science at all, but more on a want to be able to hunt them. The science actually shows that the herds of moose and caribou are doing quite well and there isn't a need for the culling.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

So does anyone, (either then SSL who says it's ok because we are killing killers and it's natural) have any positive things about aerial wolf hunting.... I can't find anything

 

[Margene]

So does anyone, (either then SSL who says it's ok because we are killing killers and it's natural) have any positive things about aerial wolf hunting.... I can't find anything

Nope. Not a thing from me. I think it's cruel bloodsport.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Like it or not, if we choose to live in areas that we must share with wildlife, we do need to maintain control over the population. Any real hunter (not a poacher) will tell you that if you don't regulate the population of animals, they will die out anyways, they will literally eat themselves into famine.

 

[Margene]

Like it or not, if we choose to live in areas that we must share with wildlife, we do need to maintain control over the population. Any real hunter (not a poacher) will tell you that if you don't regulate the population of animals, they will die out anyways, they will literally eat themselves into famine.

True, but the aerial aspect of this, as I understand it, causes the animal to be run to exhaustion. If the shot is not a "clean kill", the poor creature could suffer for days.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

True, but the aerial aspect of this, as I understand it, causes the animal to be run to exhaustion. If the shot is not a "clean kill", the poor creature could suffer for days.

Unfortunately I cannot do anything about people who cannot shoot worth a damn, and no I don't agree with that method at all. But simply put, if it comes between a wolves coming into towns and snatching kids or livestock, the wolf goes. You cannot ALWAYS let your emotions run wild when it comes to harnessing nature. We have to someway co-exist with the wild. Part of that bargain like it or not, is control.

 

[Margene]

Unfortunately I cannot do anything about people who cannot shoot worth a damn, and no I don't agree with that method at all. But simply put, if it comes between a wolves coming into towns and snatching kids or livestock, the wolf goes. You cannot ALWAYS let your emotions run wild when it comes to harnessing nature. We have to someway co-exist with the wild. Part of that bargain like it or not, is control.

Straightforward hunting and culling, I can agree with. It's the fact that the aerial hunt is inhumane.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

The reason the do it from aircraft is because they are to fucking lazy to walk through the bush. With a plane they cover a lot of ground in a very short time. Real sporting. Kinda like sitting up a tree waiting for a deer to meander past.

Have you ever actually BEEN to Alaska? It's no walk in the park, and it's the most sparse state in the country. You have any idea how far you might have to hike to kill one wolf?

The purpose is to accomplish as much as you can with the time period.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Unfortunately I cannot do anything about people who cannot shoot worth a damn, and no I don't agree with that method at all. But simply put, if it comes between a wolves coming into towns and snatching kids or livestock, the wolf goes. You cannot ALWAYS let your emotions run wild when it comes to harnessing nature. We have to someway co-exist with the wild. Part of that bargain like it or not, is control.

Did you know that there's never been a documented case of a healthy wild wolf killing or seriously injuring a person in North America?

The reason why I have a problem with this 'control' is because I think it's doing more damage then it's helping. They are killing tons of wolves (80% of the population in some areas) without having true numbers of the caribou and moose in the area. If you have too many moose and caribou they too, will eat themselves into starvation, and if we had severe whether, they could all get very sick or die at the same time. Like a mass extinction. In that article that Tim provided they said that they started one wolf killing program to raise the caribou population from 3'000 to 3'500 so there was enough food for the people to eat (they agreed before hand that 3'500 was enough to feed everyone). One biologist didn't think they had the right numbers so he did an extensive population count to see how many there really were, they ended up with over 3'600. So then the government simply decided they needed 4'200 caribou to feed the people, and passed the wolf killing anyways.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Have you ever actually BEEN to Alaska? It's no walk in the park, and it's the most sparse state in the country. You have any idea how far you might have to hike to kill one wolf?

The purpose is to accomplish as much as you can with the time period.

I see government officials using aerial wolf hunting to control the populations... but I don't see novice hunters being able to do it too. If it was a well trained gun man who mostly never let an animal suffer, that would be much better then the 12 year old with his dad learning how to 'become a man' who shoots a wolf in the foot and then follows it for an hour before they finish the job.

It seems to me that the regular hunters should have to hunt from the ground, and population control should be able to use any means necessary.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Did you know that there's never been a documented case of a healthy wild wolf killing or seriously injuring a person in North America?

The reason why I have a problem with this 'control' is because I think it's doing more damage then it's helping. They are killing tons of wolves (80% of the population in some areas) without having true numbers of the caribou and moose in the area. If you have too many moose and caribou they too, will eat themselves into starvation, and if we had severe whether, they could all get very sick or die at the same time. Like a mass extinction. In that article that Tim provided they said that they started one wolf killing program to raise the caribou population from 3'000 to 3'500 so there was enough food for the people to eat (they agreed before hand that 3'500 was enough to feed everyone). One biologist didn't think they had the right numbers so he did an extensive population count to see how many there really were, they ended up with over 3'600. So then the government simply decided they needed 4'200 caribou to feed the people, and passed the wolf killing anyways.

I find that very hard to believe Bri. Coyotes that we have in my state have attacked and caused serious damage to folks.

Not sure how it is in your neck of the woods, but here, we have federal trappers and varmit control officers, because slant the story whichever way you need, but they do need to be controlled for a lot of reasons, not just dangers to humans.

I would love to find out how you determined that stat about wolves....

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I find that very hard to believe Bri. Coyotes that we have in my state have attacked and caused serious damage to folks.

Not sure how it is in your neck of the woods, but here, we have federal trappers and varmit control officers, because slant the story whichever way you need, but they do need to be controlled for a lot of reasons, not just dangers to humans.

I would love to find out how you determined that stat about wolves....

That's what I have been told by the zoo for the past 5 years I have volunteered there. They say we have to have correct facts, because if we are wrong the AZA will discredit us if we tell them the wrong facts. Coyotes are MUCH different animals then wolves.

I am an environmentalist that believes in hunting. But I also believe in controlling populations in ways that is good for them, not detrimental because it makes more money or is 'more fun'.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I see government officials using aerial wolf hunting to control the populations... but I don't see novice hunters being able to do it too. If it was a well trained gun man who mostly never let an animal suffer, that would be much better then the 12 year old with his dad learning how to 'become a man' who shoots a wolf in the foot and then follows it for an hour before they finish the job.

It seems to me that the regular hunters should have to hunt from the ground, and population control should be able to use any means necessary.

And you have every right to your opinion. On the other hand you can see where the killing of anything isn't by it's very nature.....Humane...Right? I mean killing is killing.

I USED to be an avid hunter, deer, doves, ducks....hell anything worth eating but woke up one day and lost my taste for it. It just doesn't appeal to me anymore. But I won't stand in the way of anyone else doing it.

Scientists are ALWAYS going to disagree and determining the amount of ranging animals is going to change from year to year depending on a lot of factors, overall herd health, quantities of water, predators, offspring count and what gets hunted.

It's a constantly moving target, so don't ever think that if someone says we need 4,000....That that number won't change.

Just like the person that said there has never been a reported case of wolf attacks on humans:24:

I mean that's just silly...They are proven predators.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Wolves are shy and afraid of people because of hunting, and it's important that we keep them that way. But we should be controlling them responsibly, and from what I have read so far, it doesn't seem we are.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

That's what I have been told by the zoo for the past 5 years I have volunteered there. They say we have to have correct facts, because if we are wrong the AZA will discredit us if we tell them the wrong facts. Coyotes are MUCH different animals then wolves.

I am an environmentalist that believes in hunting. But I also believe in controlling populations in ways that is good for them, not detrimental because it makes more money or is 'more fun'.

Yes...They are and the Gray Wolf is MUCH more aggressive. Hell coyotes are small, trust me...I've killed them.

So you've been volunteering at the Zoo since you were 11?

 

[Goat Whisperer]

And you have every right to your opinion. On the other hand you can see where the killing of anything isn't by it's very nature.....Humane...Right? I mean killing is killing.

I USED to be an avid hunter, deer, doves, ducks....hell anything worth eating but woke up one day and lost my taste for it. It just doesn't appeal to me anymore. But I won't stand in the way of anyone else doing it.

Scientists are ALWAYS going to disagree and determining the amount of ranging animals is going to change from year to year depending on a lot of factors, overall herd health, quantities of water, predators, offspring count and what gets hunted.

It's a constantly moving target, so don't ever think that if someone says we need 4,000....That that number won't change.

Just like the person that said there has never been a reported case of wolf attacks on humans:24:

I mean that's just silly...They are proven predators.

I said that wolves that are healthy (not desperate for food, sick and dying, HEALTHY) have never killed a person in North America. I didn't say they haven't attacked a person, or killed someone out of desperation, as I don't know if they have.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Wolves are shy and afraid of people because of hunting, and it's important that we keep them that way. But we should be controlling them responsibly, and from what I have read so far, it doesn't seem we are.

You really can't say population control and humane in the same sentence. Frankly I could care less, no they do not need to be hunted into extinction, but they need to be controlled.