I'm sure it only went downhill for him realizing he was about to become somebody's dinner.I felt the same way seeing that. Nothing dies of old age in the park. Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then are certainly in desparete need of something to eat. I just hope it went fast for that pathetic bison.Cledus wrote:Hard to look at those and not feel a little bad for the buffalo, even though it was a fascinating sequence of photos. The pictures of his burned eyes were pretty gross.
The bison looks really bad, I can't help but wonder if he was already sick because the animals in the park have to be aware of the dangers or they'd be getting cooked all the time.seataccat wrote:I felt the same way seeing that. Nothing dies of old age in the park. Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then are certainly in desparete need of something to eat. I just hope it went fast for that pathetic bison.Cledus wrote:Hard to look at those and not feel a little bad for the buffalo, even though it was a fascinating sequence of photos. The pictures of his burned eyes were pretty gross.
Nothing dies of old age in the park, NOW...elk used to die of old age ALL the time (before wolves were reintroduced).seataccat wrote:I felt the same way seeing that. Nothing dies of old age in the park. Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then are certainly in desparete need of something to eat. I just hope it went fast for that pathetic bison.Cledus wrote:Hard to look at those and not feel a little bad for the buffalo, even though it was a fascinating sequence of photos. The pictures of his burned eyes were pretty gross.
Yea, it wasn't exactly an intact predator prey relationship until the wolves were brought back. I spend a lot of time in British Columbia backpacking, hunting and fishing. The majority of the country has healthy populations of grizzlies and wolves unlike Montana, Idaho or Wyoming. I always make it a point to ask any rancher or ranch hand about raising cattle with the wolves and bears. I talked to dozens and it's almost always the same story. It goes something like this "oh yea, a couple years ago we had a wolf kill a calf" or "yea, I think the wolves got my dog, I haven't seen him around for a couple of weeks". Never have I heard hysteria like "They will come and eat your children" like you hear around Montana, Idaho or Wyoming. When elk are dying of old age and there are no willows along the creeks in the park it's time to bring in the predators. Hunting should be the privilege of having an intact predator prey relationship. When you try to manage herds by hunting the biggest bull from it every year you will eventually screw it up every time.WetWaderMT wrote:Nothing dies of old age in the park, NOW...elk used to die of old age ALL the time (before wolves were reintroduced).seataccat wrote:I felt the same way seeing that. Nothing dies of old age in the park. Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then are certainly in desparete need of something to eat. I just hope it went fast for that pathetic bison.Cledus wrote:Hard to look at those and not feel a little bad for the buffalo, even though it was a fascinating sequence of photos. The pictures of his burned eyes were pretty gross.
He had just gotten up from hibernating. This happened in April of '09.Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then
They do get cooked all the time. In the backcountry where you can walk right up to springs, there are very few that you can't see some elk or buffalo bones in.ChiOCat wrote:The bison looks really bad, I can't help but wonder if he was already sick because the animals in the park have to be aware of the dangers or they'd be getting cooked all the time.seataccat wrote:I felt the same way seeing that. Nothing dies of old age in the park. Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then are certainly in desparete need of something to eat. I just hope it went fast for that pathetic bison.Cledus wrote:Hard to look at those and not feel a little bad for the buffalo, even though it was a fascinating sequence of photos. The pictures of his burned eyes were pretty gross.
I was happy to read the bison got away until I saw they had to put him down the next day. At least he could have been dinner for the bear.
Talk about "usual drivel."seataccat wrote:Yea, it wasn't exactly an intact predator prey relationship until the wolves were brought back. I spend a lot of time in British Columbia backpacking, hunting and fishing. The majority of the country has healthy populations of grizzlies and wolves unlike Montana, Idaho or Wyoming. I always make it a point to ask any rancher or ranch hand about raising cattle with the wolves and bears. I talked to dozens and it's almost always the same story. It goes something like this "oh yea, a couple years ago we had a wolf kill a calf" or "yea, I think the wolves got my dog, I haven't seen him around for a couple of weeks". Never have I heard hysteria like "They will come and eat your children" like you hear around Montana, Idaho or Wyoming. When elk are dying of old age and there are no willows along the creeks in the park it's time to bring in the predators. Hunting should be the privilege of having an intact predator prey relationship. When you try to manage herds by hunting the biggest bull from it every year you will eventually screw it up every time.WetWaderMT wrote:Nothing dies of old age in the park, NOW...elk used to die of old age ALL the time (before wolves were reintroduced).seataccat wrote:I felt the same way seeing that. Nothing dies of old age in the park. Those grizzlies that have not hibernated by then are certainly in desparete need of something to eat. I just hope it went fast for that pathetic bison.Cledus wrote:Hard to look at those and not feel a little bad for the buffalo, even though it was a fascinating sequence of photos. The pictures of his burned eyes were pretty gross.
I spent a year doing grizzly bear research in Glacier Park with a woman named Clair Gower. She has written a PhD at MSU on this very subject in case anyone wants to know what the wolf elk relationship is really like without the politics. I know you have a little reading comprehension problem Wader so i'll expect your usual drivel.
http://etd.lib.montana.edu/etd/2009/gow ... rC0509.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Well I'm sure you're happy now that the predator/prey relationship has been re-established. You'd rather see that than livelihoods of your fellow man damaged because of the reintroduction of wolves (of a different, larger sub-species, no less). My neighbors, both sheep ranchers in their 80's, lost a couple dozen sheep to wolves in ONE NIGHT in 2005, mostly ewes whose bloodlines had been developed for decades; that type of genetics simply can't be replaced. There's nothing more heartbreaking than seeing a bellweather lamb bleeding from the neck, trying to walk as it's guts drag along on the ground behind it.seataccat wrote:It’s hard to underestimating the intelligence of wetwader but he always seems to surprise me. Everything he posts on here boils down to partisan politics. I shouldn’t be amazed but I always am when somebody will reject peer reviewed science that doesn’t match their agenda as some kind of liberal conspiracy theory.
Not sure what you meant when you said “The fact that you compare British Columbia to Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming is even more revealing” but let me guess, it has something to do with liberal politics? To make it simple for you wader, my point about British Columbia is that it is a very large tract of land with healthy populations of wildlife including wolves, grizzlies, caribou, moose, deer and elk. It has free flowing rivers with awesome salmon and steelhead runs. They are truly managed by the predator prey relationship. Montana, Idaho and Wyoming do not have the predator prey relationship except in isolated parts of Yellowstone and Glacier. We should see hunting as the privilege of having healthy populations due to predator prey not as a way to manage herds. Most people living in BC outside the metropolitan Vancouver area regularly deal with wolves and grizzlies and you don’t hear the hysteria that you do in MT, ID, and WY. It just boils down to a lack of education and experience and misinformation that is propagated by hysteria. Isn’t it amazing that when people see the predator prey relationship in action they demonize it? Wolves are not exotic to MT, ID and WY.
It may be too late for Montana, since there is not enough undeveloped land. It may soon be like most every other state in the country as far as wildlife goes. Overrun with tick infected deer because of the lack of predators. Large populations of urban coyotes, and raccoons, kind of like Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and many others. Some people are just fine with a million elk walking around Yellowstone like cattle if it means they can fill their elk tag every year without having to walk more than 50 yards from the truck.
I go steelhead fishing a few times a year in BC with a guy that makes a living guiding Americans moose hunting on the Stikine. He has so many stories about the pot bellied; blow hard, knee jerks from the states he has to deal with. Wetwader is a prototype example.
All the bleeding hearts that want wolves reintroduced fail to realize that wolves don't kill to eat, and they don't actually kill their prey. Instead they hunt and bite and rip apart their victims leaving them to die of their wounds. It is the most heart wrenching thing you will ever see.There's nothing more heartbreaking than seeing a bellweather lamb bleeding from the neck, trying to walk as it's guts drag along on the ground behind it.
Your implication that the gray wolves are an exotic species to Montana is really stupid. Talk about drinking the Koolaid. When Lewis and Clark came through they were not looking at Mexican wolves. Large arctic gray wolves were part of the North American rocky mountain landscape since the last ice age.grizzh8r wrote:Well I'm sure you're happy now that the predator/prey relationship has been re-established. You'd rather see that than livelihoods of your fellow man damaged because of the reintroduction of wolves (of a different, larger sub-species, no less). My neighbors, both sheep ranchers in their 80's, lost a couple dozen sheep to wolves in ONE NIGHT in 2005, mostly ewes whose bloodlines had been developed for decades; that type of genetics simply can't be replaced. There's nothing more heartbreaking than seeing a bellweather lamb bleeding from the neck, trying to walk as it's guts drag along on the ground behind it.seataccat wrote:It’s hard to underestimating the intelligence of wetwader but he always seems to surprise me. Everything he posts on here boils down to partisan politics. I shouldn’t be amazed but I always am when somebody will reject peer reviewed science that doesn’t match their agenda as some kind of liberal conspiracy theory.
Not sure what you meant when you said “The fact that you compare British Columbia to Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming is even more revealing” but let me guess, it has something to do with liberal politics? To make it simple for you wader, my point about British Columbia is that it is a very large tract of land with healthy populations of wildlife including wolves, grizzlies, caribou, moose, deer and elk. It has free flowing rivers with awesome salmon and steelhead runs. They are truly managed by the predator prey relationship. Montana, Idaho and Wyoming do not have the predator prey relationship except in isolated parts of Yellowstone and Glacier. We should see hunting as the privilege of having healthy populations due to predator prey not as a way to manage herds. Most people living in BC outside the metropolitan Vancouver area regularly deal with wolves and grizzlies and you don’t hear the hysteria that you do in MT, ID, and WY. It just boils down to a lack of education and experience and misinformation that is propagated by hysteria. Isn’t it amazing that when people see the predator prey relationship in action they demonize it? Wolves are not exotic to MT, ID and WY.
It may be too late for Montana, since there is not enough undeveloped land. It may soon be like most every other state in the country as far as wildlife goes. Overrun with tick infected deer because of the lack of predators. Large populations of urban coyotes, and raccoons, kind of like Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and many others. Some people are just fine with a million elk walking around Yellowstone like cattle if it means they can fill their elk tag every year without having to walk more than 50 yards from the truck.
I go steelhead fishing a few times a year in BC with a guy that makes a living guiding Americans moose hunting on the Stikine. He has so many stories about the pot bellied; blow hard, knee jerks from the states he has to deal with. Wetwader is a prototype example.
My uncles have a section of land south of Dailey Lake near Emigrant where they have outfitted and run their cattle for the last 35 years. Their outfitting business is now all but done for, especially now that I-161 passed (yet another long term "unintended consequence" of wolf reintroduction). When they bring their cattle out of the hills come October, their calves weigh 50-100 lbs. less due to being run up and down the hills. In a business that works on dollars per hundred weight, that means a pretty big hit to the paycheck. It's pretty hard on the mothers as well; you end up with a lame, sore, weakened herd.
The fact that you think the wolf population is isolated to just yellowstone and glacier shows just how much koolaid you've been drinking. There are now established wolf popluations in most of western Montana, Wyoming, and most of southern Idaho. They have been sighted as far east as Lewistown, and as far south as the Denver area. But then again, what do I know, I'm just a pot bellied blowhard American idiot. Move to Canada already, if you like it there so much.
FIrst of all, it looks like you need to do a bit of research yourself (and quit drinking the koolaid). There are 24 different reconized sub-species of canis lupus, a couple of which are extinct. Read on:seataccat wrote:Your implication that the gray wolves are an exotic species to Montana is really stupid. Talk about drinking the Koolaid. When Lewis and Clark came through they were not looking at Mexican wolves. Large arctic gray wolves were part of the North American rocky mountain landscape since the last ice age.grizzh8r wrote:Well I'm sure you're happy now that the predator/prey relationship has been re-established. You'd rather see that than livelihoods of your fellow man damaged because of the reintroduction of wolves (of a different, larger sub-species, no less). My neighbors, both sheep ranchers in their 80's, lost a couple dozen sheep to wolves in ONE NIGHT in 2005, mostly ewes whose bloodlines had been developed for decades; that type of genetics simply can't be replaced. There's nothing more heartbreaking than seeing a bellweather lamb bleeding from the neck, trying to walk as it's guts drag along on the ground behind it.seataccat wrote:It’s hard to underestimating the intelligence of wetwader but he always seems to surprise me. Everything he posts on here boils down to partisan politics. I shouldn’t be amazed but I always am when somebody will reject peer reviewed science that doesn’t match their agenda as some kind of liberal conspiracy theory.
Not sure what you meant when you said “The fact that you compare British Columbia to Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming is even more revealing” but let me guess, it has something to do with liberal politics? To make it simple for you wader, my point about British Columbia is that it is a very large tract of land with healthy populations of wildlife including wolves, grizzlies, caribou, moose, deer and elk. It has free flowing rivers with awesome salmon and steelhead runs. They are truly managed by the predator prey relationship. Montana, Idaho and Wyoming do not have the predator prey relationship except in isolated parts of Yellowstone and Glacier. We should see hunting as the privilege of having healthy populations due to predator prey not as a way to manage herds. Most people living in BC outside the metropolitan Vancouver area regularly deal with wolves and grizzlies and you don’t hear the hysteria that you do in MT, ID, and WY. It just boils down to a lack of education and experience and misinformation that is propagated by hysteria. Isn’t it amazing that when people see the predator prey relationship in action they demonize it? Wolves are not exotic to MT, ID and WY.
It may be too late for Montana, since there is not enough undeveloped land. It may soon be like most every other state in the country as far as wildlife goes. Overrun with tick infected deer because of the lack of predators. Large populations of urban coyotes, and raccoons, kind of like Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and many others. Some people are just fine with a million elk walking around Yellowstone like cattle if it means they can fill their elk tag every year without having to walk more than 50 yards from the truck.
I go steelhead fishing a few times a year in BC with a guy that makes a living guiding Americans moose hunting on the Stikine. He has so many stories about the pot bellied; blow hard, knee jerks from the states he has to deal with. Wetwader is a prototype example.
My uncles have a section of land south of Dailey Lake near Emigrant where they have outfitted and run their cattle for the last 35 years. Their outfitting business is now all but done for, especially now that I-161 passed (yet another long term "unintended consequence" of wolf reintroduction). When they bring their cattle out of the hills come October, their calves weigh 50-100 lbs. less due to being run up and down the hills. In a business that works on dollars per hundred weight, that means a pretty big hit to the paycheck. It's pretty hard on the mothers as well; you end up with a lame, sore, weakened herd.
The fact that you think the wolf population is isolated to just yellowstone and glacier shows just how much koolaid you've been drinking. There are now established wolf popluations in most of western Montana, Wyoming, and most of southern Idaho. They have been sighted as far east as Lewistown, and as far south as the Denver area. But then again, what do I know, I'm just a pot bellied blowhard American idiot. Move to Canada already, if you like it there so much.
I am not sympathetic to ranchers that have had free grazing rights to public land for the last 35 years. I think you can blame the price of beef from corporate farming for their demise way more than the wolf. I know that isn’t going to happen anytime soon. Since the Supreme Court decided that corporations can spend any amount of cash without disclosure on any political agenda they want in the name of free speech. Follow the money. It doesn’t have anything to do with wolves. It’s a much larger corporate agenda, such as water rights, cheap grazing leases and farm subsidies. Farm subsidies are killing small farmers. The wolf is just something that simple minded people can understand. Throw in a few pathetic sheep stories and hard working rancher types being hurt by the big bad wolf and everyone jumps on board for the big win. I am sure you were traumatized as a boy from the little red riding hood story. Most people cannot understand subtleties in arguments but they can understand the big bad wolf is coming to get them. Since most Montanans have never seen nor dealt with a wolf they believe the hysterical anecdotes.
I have some anecdotes of my own. My family has two working ranches/farms in Jefferson county one about 1500 acres and one about 30 acres both are barely hanging on to about 30 head. Both are about to give up the ghost due to my uncles age’s, the price of beef and the amount of work. Neither one has ever seen a wolf. I am sure I have spent far more time in the backcountry of Montana than most anyone you know. I have spent a four month stretch hiking every day and sleeping on the ground in Glacier, been all over the Selway Bitterroot, and the Anaconda Pintler. I have drifted and hiked the entire Jefferson and Beaverhead Rivers and I have seen one wolf. On the other hand I have seen scads of wolves in the Yukon, British Columbia and Arctic Canada. There are more cattle in BC Canada than in Montana. How do the ranchers do it? Why are they not up in arms about their caribou, moose and elk hunting being decimated?
The bottom line is the well being of the habitat is more important than the pocket books of a few ranchers that are just generally blowing smoke. You need predation to keep the ungulate herds healthy. You can’t just shoot the biggest buck/bull in the heard every year and call that management. I am a hunter and conversationalist and would like my kids to experience hunting a true wild animal. If you want no predators move to Michigan, there is tons of game to hunt there.
http://www.bowhunting.net/artman/publis ... nter.shtmlThe native wolf of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming (irremotus), is a medium sized wolf. Adult males normally topped out in weight at around 80 pounds, with females commonly around 60 pounds at maturity. The Canadian wolves (columbianus, occidentalis & griseoalbus) are the mega wolves of North America. Adult males can easily top 140 pounds at maturity, and it's not uncommon for females to top 100 pounds at 7 to 8 years of age. Being 40-percent larger than the native wolf (irremotus), these Canadian transplants require a lot more wildlife and livestock to keep fed...and to provide for their "sport killing" sprees.
For many decades, wildlife scientists recognized the different subspecies for their obvious physical differences, resulting from how these wolves evolved to better adapt to their native environments. The Canadian replacements brought in by the geniuses of USFWS are larger, more muscular, more powerful and more aggressive wolves than the wolf which was the product of a million or more years of evolution living in the Northern Rocky Mountain states. The non-native wolves dumped here, in their native Canadian range, were commonly forced to hunt extremely large areas, maybe 200 to 300 square miles, to keep a pack fed. And to insure that large game, such as moose and bison, could be efficiently brought down, these giant wolves commonly hunted in packs. The native wolf of the Northern U.S. Rockies was a more timid, less aggressive wolf that generally hunted alone or in pairs, and typically stayed inside a much smaller range.
Consequently, Canis lupus irremotus (a.k.a. the "timber wolf") had a much lesser impact on big game populations.
None of the three Canadian wolf subspecies that were likely transplanted here by the USFWS were ever native to Montana, Idaho or Wyoming. Furthermore, not one of these subspecies are endangered in its native range in Canada.