Whats your take on the wolf problem.

9/29/2008 6:46:30 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	I'll proabaly be sorry for bringing this subject up again but the wolf problem is getting worse.Do any of you have any ideas on what to do with this problem? Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!
10/1/2008 12:34:36 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cheswick1 Billings, MT 46, joined Jul. 2008	I think there are two problems 1 they are back on the list and two when they were off the list they were mishandled. a season in which to harvest is a good idea as far as keeping numbers in check. means of taking should be that of fair chase big game regulations. I am all for a season on wolfs. imo if there are people in the know with the information that confirms the neccesity of harvest "such as wildlife biologists" than there should not be a problem. there are alot of people with good intentions and bad information. imo.
10/2/2008 12:20:53 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
bubba17 Superior, MT 34, joined Jul. 2008	Problem with wolves is the people making the decisions for what to do with them can't point to a map where they reside. They have never been to MT have never seen a wolf i the wild, and probably never will. We need to start making decisions for ourselves rather than have daddy tell us to puppy sit a pack of killers. Our ancesters knew what they were doing and they shot, poisened trapped and almost eradicated a supreme killer(can't even call them hunters a hunter implies that they go out looking and sometimes do not get) I don't know about the rest of you but where I live the wolves have just recently moved back in and the other animals are changing their habits because of it. (elk have stopped bugling/ changed the way they communicate) Makes it tough on a bow hunter. That's my two cents on a hot topic. Better luck next year i guess.
10/3/2008 12:50:12 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
glendiver Helena, MT 51, joined Sep. 2008	I've got to agree with cheswick and bubba. I live in Eastern Montana and we don't have wolves but I do elk hunt out in the west. Where the elk were once plentyful they're few and far between or a helluva lot harder to find. Wolves in the wild are close to sharks in the ocean. They're the perfect predator!
10/3/2008 1:07:33 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
thegoose420 Belgrade, MT 70, joined Jan. 2008	Once again I feel that they should be allowed to live like any other animal or human - we need to stop invading their territory - I feel bad that farm animals are effected by this - changing their area of habitat to Yellowstone would be one solution - just love all animal and hate to see them destroyed
10/5/2008 3:27:46 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
hairynugly Missoula, MT 42, joined Jul. 2008	My take....While we want to believe that humans and animals are distinct, we are not; we are all animals. It is inconsistent to ‘feel’ bad for farm animals but not feel bad for the interests of our fellow human animals. In the end, it is impossible for humans to make judgments of this sort outside a human-centric value structure (the crux of the problem). Nevertheless, wolves persist in our territories. Although there are many ecological interdependencies in our world, human survival is not ‘necessarily’ determined by the participation of wolves...rather human survival is only determined ‘sufficiently’ by the existence of wolves. That is, the actualization of the argument ‘if wolves, then humans’ is not equivalent to ‘if no wolves, then no humans.’ Although, one could say, if no humans, then wolves, or, if no wolves, then humans, to say human or wolf survival is dependent on the other’s existence is wrong. Rather such conclusions only exist in the abstract. In the end, it is possible without wolves humans could exist. And more importantly without wolves, human flourishing could be aggrandized; because wolves, like Homo-Sapien-Sapiens, are predators. They compete with human interest. And (most importantly) if they could be eradicated, human interests could be more secure. (If only we could only figure out how to eradicate viruses!)...but not to be misunderstood, human survival is not dependent on the eradication of wolves. And nor is human flourishing. We are ridiculously superior creatures in terms of efficiency and efficacy. (Unlike a virus, when was the last time a wolf set off something like a nuclear bomb or started a campfire?) And furthermore, I see no compelling reason to extinguish wolves from Earth. (Build taller fences, god-damn-it, man should respect life...it’s not unlike a miracle that we are here.).....But of course, I could be wrong.
10/8/2008 12:58:21 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cheswick1 Billings, MT 46, joined Jul. 2008	i dont think anybody ever said render them extinct. controlling a population is totally different than what the replies are suggesting. management is the key word. [Edited 10/8/2008 12:59:06 PM ]
10/8/2008 2:58:45 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
bubba17 Superior, MT 34, joined Jul. 2008	Managament is an easy thing to say while living in an area without wolves. Try being here where the wolves are and seeing them kill your friends livestock or hearing of them traipsing after your little sister while she is out hunting in the woods. I am going to just say they are an animal that I wouldn't mind seeing, but I don't want to see them from my front porch. Managament is one thing, babysitting is another.
10/8/2008 7:50:31 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	The wolves were once wipped out of this aera by people that had enough of the distruction of their livestock.It was the tree huggers that don't even live anywhere close to here that wanted them brought back.The farmres are having a hard enough time making a living as it is without having to deal with a bunch of killing machines runing loose all over the place.Now the state is paying the farmers for their lost animals that were killed by wolves.That money comes out of the pockets of every tax payer in this state.They were run out of this area once and they need to be run out again.
10/8/2008 10:12:00 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
santababy Hemet, CA 70, joined Jan. 2007	It's never just one thing or the other. I just wonder if all the buffalo hadn't been killed,, would there be enough meat for both man and wolf, except for the Indians and Chinese of course. You may just have to work the night shift with night-vision on your scope. It is your animals that need protection. I don't think you can depend on the government to solve your problem, even if they caused it. What kind of answers were you hoping to get here on DateHookup? Another Annie Oakley maybe?:
10/8/2008 11:45:02 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
newlyreleased1 Three Forks, MT 41, joined Jul. 2008	I was reading some of the replies to this and I need to drop my two cents in. I don't think that the problem is primarily the wolves. It's the timing of the reintroduction. They have introduced a top tier predator into an ecosystem that hasn't seen that level of predation in 50+ years. None of the prey animals, and damn few people, are still alive to remember how to cope with this particular animal. If the wolf were a viable predator for this ecosystem, there would still have been wolves before the reintroduction. They would have adapted and survived (look at coyotes). The wolves time has passed for the Yellowstone and surrounding areas. We can't live and let live anymore- there's not enough room. Sad but it's the truth. The wolves have so far demonstrated no ability to adapt to the new way. If they can't adapt, they can't stay.
10/9/2008 12:58:43 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cheswick1 Billings, MT 46, joined Jul. 2008	Maybe the term management was taken the wrong way. i used that term in regards to harvest or killing the animals. I am all for a season on wolves. and as far as killing them all i am not sure that would be possible by any means anyway. coyotes are hunted year round and i still seem to get my share every year.
10/24/2008 5:14:54 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
rapalajack Fort Benton, MT 57, joined Jul. 2008	SHOOT SHOVEL and SHUT UP
10/25/2008 1:55:54 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
macinmt Kalispell, MT 66, joined Jun. 2008	Don't really know alot about the problem. But seems to me if a domestic animal was killing stock it would be put down.
11/7/2008 12:41:05 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
ruzzt Kansas City, MO 41, joined Sep. 2007	My opinion... Call the Alaska Governor, I'm sure she'd be up to the task of culling the population via helicopter. Seriously, Wolves being a top tier predator, need to be protected. But, if they try to integrate themselves into human areas, then they should most definitely be 'controlled'. The fear of man will keep both parties happy and safe.
11/7/2008 8:47:49 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
bubba17 Superior, MT 34, joined Jul. 2008	Have hunted almost three weeks. Saw one set of elk tracks running. Have heard of people shooting elk (all in the low country close to homes) The wolves have changed the way our elk pattern over he past three years. We have gone from one pack that just came in and hunted the border to 7 breeding packs a total of over 30 wolves. Anywhere you hunt you see more elk tracks than game. Is this a problem for our county? Considering our vey high poverty level and the rate that mills aro cutting back, Yes. I am woried of the ladder effect that reintroduction is starting. I agree wit someone earlier, I have already been a shoot on sight hunter the same that I ave always been for coyotes. Hopefully some people pull teir heads out (rocky mountain elk foundation) and start putting heir moneys towards te probems. (Maybe their big supporters are wolf fans) (Maybe they hould change their name, I myself canceled my membership until they address this issue.
12/24/2008 4:27:31 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
jesse72 Livingston, MT 45, joined Nov. 2008	the wolf was here thousands of years befor man was, let them be and learn to live with 'em. I'm not a treehugger or animal-nut, but we choose to live in a part of the country where wolfs live, so we have to accept and with them!
12/25/2008 10:52:45 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
thethrilla Billings, MT 35, joined Aug. 2008	Hunting is a natural balance in nature. Whether it be man or animal that is doing the hunting. I think that they should open to the hunt, but in limited numbers. We don't really need to bring extinction to them, on the other hand, they do need to be controlled.
1/10/2009 2:52:54 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cyercurls Whitehall, MT 62, joined Nov. 2008	Quote from thegoose420: Once again I feel that they should be allowed to live like any other animal or human - we need to stop invading their territory - I feel bad that farm animals are effected by this - changing their area of habitat to Yellowstone would be one solution - just love all animal and hate to see them destroyed Since they were canadian wolves brought down to Yellowstone, and they arent't staying there, though most of us from Montana knew they wouldn't, thegoose420-how do you propose to keep them in Yellowstone? Hmmmmm With all the millions of dollars to bring them down, pertect them, how much do you suppose it would cost to keep them there? Montana wolves weren't extinct anyway, and were kept at a low enough number, they didn't pose a huge problem. Now, all the efforts of our elustrious wolf crowd have caused more harm than good, and neither they, or the wolves are natives to this area. Wanna see a canadian wolf, go to Canada!
3/3/2009 10:08:50 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	The goverment spent $237,000,000.over ten years to keep track of the wolves.Who do you think paid for that?
3/6/2009 11:33:26 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
jakeman44 Bozeman, MT 51, joined Jan. 2009	shoot 'em
3/8/2009 12:40:28 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
farmersgurl State Center, IA 54, joined Jan. 2009	they always say there should be a balance in everything and I see no problem with helping nature thin out more. shoot ! [Edited 3/8/2009 12:41:09 PM ]
3/8/2009 3:43:28 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
andoni58 Bozeman, MT 59, joined Jan. 2009	xxxxxxxxxxx [Edited 3/8/2009 3:54:52 PM ]
3/10/2009 2:56:49 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
wolfchild Billings, MT 59, joined Nov. 2007	I camp in the Big Horn Mountains and there is a wolf pack that has come to know me, my smell and can sense my good heart. these animals are not vicious killers as they are quite selective, only killing the weak,injured and old. I think that wolves should remain unharmed as they are needed in the chain of life. the wolf pack that I know loves me and would never harm me; in fact when I was homeless and had to camp in the mountains for a long period the wolves were my protectors, sleeping every night in the light of my camp fire. I have never felt safer, I know in my heart that these beautiful animals really know when someone is out to hurt them or leave them in peace.Every year I camp in the same location and every year the same wolf pack comes to my tent,takes a sniff and knows who I am, I love them dearly and to see them harmed in any way would be like losing my beloved dog.I Love My Wolves!
3/11/2009 11:23:00 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
mischiefqq Billings, MT 66, joined Dec. 2008	My take on the wolf "problem": Too many people.
5/24/2009 9:32:19 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
andrea_05 Columbia Falls, MT 30, joined Feb. 2009	smoke a pack a day!!!lol idk really what im talking about.
7/27/2009 8:33:22 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
lucy_ McComb, MS 49, joined Jul. 2009	good morning ..
9/25/2009 9:31:22 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
flurb White Sulphur Springs, MT 84, joined Sep. 2009	Wolfchild is as full of crap as a Christmas turkey. Wolves often kill for the fun of it. Many of the rest of you of you are overthinking this. Our ancestors eliminated wolves for good reason. We need to eliminate them again for the same reasons. Who actually needs a wlf?
9/25/2009 1:07:36 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	I hope that everyone who bought a tag to hunt wolves get their tags filled.Go getem hunters best of luck to you. Semper Fi !!!
11/8/2009 8:51:54 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
duddde Somers, MT 39, joined Sep. 2009	wolves were hunted and killed for a reason, all creatures have the right to fight and survive including our livestock. enough said!
1/6/2010 2:55:20 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
lovehunting247 Moorhead, MN 28, joined Dec. 2009	Quote from wolfchild: I camp in the Big Horn Mountains and there is a wolf pack that has come to know me, my smell and can sense my good heart. these animals are not vicious killers as they are quite selective, only killing the weak,injured and old. I think that wolves should remain unharmed as they are needed in the chain of life. the wolf pack that I know loves me and would never harm me; in fact when I was homeless and had to camp in the mountains for a long period the wolves were my protectors, sleeping every night in the light of my camp fire. I have never felt safer, I know in my heart that these beautiful animals really know when someone is out to hurt them or leave them in peace.Every year I camp in the same location and every year the same wolf pack comes to my tent,takes a sniff and knows who I am, I love them dearly and to see them harmed in any way would be like losing my beloved dog.I Love My Wolves! HAHAHAHAHAHA you are full of crap! Theres a video of a pack of wolves that killed all but one elk out of 50 down by where I hunt! The herd I hunt had three calves this year screw the wolves! Ive done research for one of my classes and they needed to be dealt with it will just get worse! They have 3 litters a year of 6-8 pups. Shoot them all now!
1/8/2010 9:48:49 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
horsman69 Billings, MT 55, joined Dec. 2009	Quote from ruzzt: My opinion... Call the Alaska Governor, I'm sure she'd be up to the task of culling the population via helicopter. Seriously, Wolves being a top tier predator, need to be protected. But, if they try to integrate themselves into human areas, then they should most definitely be 'controlled'. The fear of man will keep both parties happy and safe. Now that leghold trapping was banned in Calif.. And the place is overrun with coyotes, and mountain lions. How's that "change" workin for you?? Wildlife management does NOT belong in the emotional public square. Emotional "animal rights" groups constently get it wrong. Hunt, Trap, and Fish. Management works..
1/9/2010 9:05:54 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	Quote from ruzzt: My opinion... Call the Alaska Governor, I'm sure she'd be up to the task of culling the population via helicopter. Seriously, Wolves being a top tier predator, need to be protected. But, if they try to integrate themselves into human areas, then they should most definitely be 'controlled'. The fear of man will keep both parties happy and safe. Now here is a guy from the middle of loonie land telling us all about wolves.ruzzt,how could you possiably have any clue about our wolves.You live in La La Land.Until you live in this aera and have knowlage firsthand of just how distructive these animals are,you should probably keep your opions to yourself. Semper Fi !!!
1/14/2010 10:25:06 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
curiouskatie Helena, MT 46, joined Aug. 2009	Wow, I'm following the guidelines by not stating names here, but those of you who show such little respect for these beautiful creatures need to realize that if we destroy these beautiful animals who have done nothing wrong, simply because in the course of their daily existance they have annoyed some of the overpopulating humans...is it much of a stretch to than destroy that annoying human pest who next causes you some minor annoyance? Now, surly there is a much better way to remedy an overpopulation problem in either species. Just off hand, I suppose I would recommend spaying and neutering just as we do with our dogs. Yes, it would take a little thought and effort rather than a bunch of idiots with guns, but hey it's worth a thought....
1/15/2010 4:52:01 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	Quote from curiouskatie: Wow, I'm following the guidelines by not stating names here, but those of you who show such little respect for these beautiful creatures need to realize that if we destroy these beautiful animals who have done nothing wrong, simply because in the course of their daily existance they have annoyed some of the overpopulating humans...is it much of a stretch to than destroy that annoying human pest who next causes you some minor annoyance? Now, surly there is a much better way to remedy an overpopulation problem in either species. Just off hand, I suppose I would recommend spaying and neutering just as we do with our dogs. Yes, it would take a little thought and effort rather than a bunch of idiots with guns, but hey it's worth a thought.... WOW,are you ever out of touch!Spay and neuter wolves?Hell half the time you can't find the damn things.Back a 100 years ago the people that lived in this aera got rid of the wolves.Up until some idiot no nothing morons from the middle of some city came up with the idea of bring them back.Those people don't live here.They don't konw first hand the distruction the wolves cause.They don't have to keep their children or pets close when outside for fear some rogue wolf or pack of wolves will drag them off and maby or maby not eat them.Wolves kill just for the hell of it as well as to eat.I say kill all of them!!! Semper Fi !!!
4/1/2010 11:41:53 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
lucy2567 Great Falls, MT 73, joined Jan. 2010	I have seen first hand what wolves can do. I have seen them attack fifteen sheep and tare them apart some are still alive and some dead and leave. They didn't eat a one. They just like to kill. The more there are the braver they get. We all cringed when we heard that the wolf was going to be introduced again. I don't know who the dumb person was that thought up the idea. He really needs his head examined. It is no fun to see your pets and live stalk torn apart and still breathing in excrutiating pain. Then you have to get a gun kill your pets. I would rather it stay the spirit or ghost of the west.
4/1/2010 11:48:28 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
lucy2567 Great Falls, MT 73, joined Jan. 2010	I just want to say I hope those aren't your last words. There just waiting for the right time to kill you. You are living very dangerously. I fear we will reading about you in the paper some day. Never trust a wolf!!!!!!!
4/1/2010 11:55:53 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
lucy2567 Great Falls, MT 73, joined Jan. 2010	Sadly, It is sad that such a beautiful animal is so vicious. It a killing machine and pretty soon children are going to be missing. No don't you tell me that the child have evil on their mind toward the wolf. So called tame wolves will kill babies laying in a play pen. Come on people do a little research on the subject. [Edited 4/2/2010 12:09:17 AM ]
4/3/2010 9:42:54 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	They should be killed off except for a few that could be taken to zoos around the country along with stories of how dangrous and destructive they really are. Semper Fi !!!
4/7/2010 7:39:40 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
here2havfun Dillon, MT 64, joined Apr. 2009	That's right,, just keep shooting,,, Don't shovel,, don't even inspect the site,,, but most importantly,,, Shut up!! Make sure you are by yourself!!
4/16/2010 1:49:13 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
nebr Thompson Falls, MT 78, joined May. 2009	Too bad You think they are great. Obviously, You don't live in the country (not just "rural" but in the country). I have 100 deer on My ranch and 85 elk. The wolves are now KILLING all the young. It dosen't eliminate the population yet, but will in the future. I was part of the wolf elimination in Nebraska during WW2. They were killing beef like crazy and the president said DO IT. The Grey wolf is one thing. The timber wolf is another matter and the hybreds,the damned wolf lovers have illegally released are now crossing with wild wolves and they are VERY BIG and VERY MEAN. If You think wolves don't kill people, first remember,they are above us on the food chain!! 2nd, contact someone in Russia and ask them!!! E mail me and I'll send You a couple of REAL picture of what a REAL wolf is all about! Jerry ocbyjer@hotmail,com [Edited 4/16/2010 1:58:03 PM ]
5/14/2010 12:18:33 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
davesdiamond89 Billings, MT 60, joined May. 2010	Will not take much longer and elk and deer populations will be so low that state of Montana is going to start losing a lot of money from the out of state hunters. Maybe then someone will wake up. I have seen the damage wolves cause and how many they kill and then what they eat, its very little. Have also been hunted by wolves in heavy timber and its not a very good feeling. I never could get a shot! When the ranchers are losing more to the wolves than they can raise it will only be a matter of time. Some areas now are sure to lose some grazing revenues, cause it will not be worth losing the stock to buy the grass for. I only hope that the hunters in not only Mt wake up cause the next thing to be reintroduced will be elk!! shoot them and walk away not even worth donating money for a tag!!
5/14/2010 4:55:46 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
bikn East Helena, MT 62, joined Jan. 2008	just like gofers target pratice
5/15/2010 10:36:59 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
raaee Missoula, MT 62, joined Apr. 2010	I hate the wolves and now take a gun when I hike
8/3/2010 10:28:00 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
duddde Somers, MT 39, joined Sep. 2009	I dont have a problem with wolves i love wolves i think everyone should have a wolfskin rug tacked to there wall ha ha ha ha ha kill em all
8/4/2010 3:49:43 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
jedipeacefrog Missoula, MT 46, joined Feb. 2010	The liberal Clinton regime demanded that wolves be re-introduced. Now we, the people, are paying the price for liberal wishy-washy activism. Simple.
8/6/2010 9:16:53 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	Well here we go again!Judge Donald Molloy has put the wolves back on the indangered list.I'll bet there is a bunch of peta morons just peeing in their pants over this lop sided ruling.The Montana Sportsmen are the ones who will suffer over this,then the state when there is no game left and they can't sell any hunting licence or game tags.I think Molloy should go out and plant his a** in the woods and watch for a while at the distruction these animals are causing to the big wildlife.Some big game,that many people rely on to get them by through the winter.The wolves are a menace and should be killed off for good,just like the people did in the early part of the last centry. Semper Fi !!!
10/3/2010 1:20:29 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	BILLINGS, Mont. – Two decades after the federal government spent a half-million dollars to study the reintroduction of gray wolves to the Northern Rockies, lawmakers say it's time for Congress to step in again — this time to clamp down on the endangered animals. To do so they are proposing to bypass the Endangered Species Act and lift protections, first enacted in 1974, for today's booming wolf population. Critics say the move would undercut one of the nation's premiere environmental laws and allow for the unchecked killing of wolves across the West. But bitterness against the iconic predator is flaring as livestock killings increase and some big game herds dwindle. And with state efforts to knock back the predators' expansion stalled in court, senators from Montana, Wyoming, Idaho and Utah want to strip wolves of their endangered status by force. "When they brought wolves to Idaho, the Legislature voted against it, the governor didn't want it and the Congressional delegation didn't want it," said Idaho Republican Sen. James Risch. "We didn't want them in the first place. But we are prepared to deal with them as we see fit." Following the reintroduction study, 66 wolves were brought from Canada to Central Idaho and Yellowstone National Park. The population hit the original recovery benchmark of 300 animals a decade ago, yet they remain officially endangered. At least 1,700 wolves now roam parts of six states. Yet wildlife advocates warn the attempt to strong-arm a public hunt through Congressional action would set a dangerous precedent for other endangered species — and unravel a wolf recovery program that has cost $30 million to date. "It's comparable to throwing an individual species off of Noah's ark," said Doug Honnold, a Montana attorney representing groups that won an Aug. 5 court ruling that returned wolves to the endangered list. No state has proposed getting rid of wolves entirely, despite calls to do so by individual ranchers. Montana and Idaho have plans to reduce their populations by 15 percent and about 40 percent, respectively. Those states and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service appealed the August ruling last week. A final ruling could take years. There also are proposals to hold wolf hunts with the animals still listed as endangered. That idea has gotten a cool reception from federal wildlife officials. State officials say intervention by Congress may be the only viable option remaining. Environmentalists have vowed to lobby hard against several wolf bills introduced in the past two weeks. And the measures face another hurdle: Lawmakers are split along party lines over which states should be allowed to hunt wolves. A measure introduced by Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester, Montana Democrats, would leave wolves endangered in Wyoming, which has a shoot-on-sight law for wolves across most of the state. That Wyoming law played a pivotal role in the August court ruling and another in 2008 that reversed a previous attempt to take wolves off the endangered list. "If Wyoming doesn't want to put forward a management plan that works, that's Wyoming's fault," Baucus said. Tester said Wyoming "hasn't wanted to play" and suggested that Montana could not wait for its southern neighbor to change its mind given ongoing livestock losses from wolf attacks. Republicans have sponsored more sweeping measures that would delist wolves across the lower 48 states, including Wyoming. Idaho's delegation has yet another bill, described as a fall-back plan, that includes only that state and Montana. Senators from both parties and across the region met last week in part to resolve the Wyoming issue. But a common front has yet to emerge. Wolves were off the endangered list for over a year before the latest court ruling. In that time, hunters in Montana and Idaho killed 260 of the animals. Environmentalists decried the shootings as unprecedented for a species just off the endangered list. Among the wolves killed were members of a well-known Yellowstone National Park pack that crossed onto Montana land. Yet those managed hunts were a far cry from the days when bounty hunters known as "wolfers" poisoned, shot, trapped and burned the species to near-extinction early last century. A count at the end of 2009 showed the region's wolf population rose slightly last year despite the hunts. Wildlife officials heralded the increase as proof the states could show restraint. Even without public hunting, government wildlife agents regularly retaliate against wolves that attack livestock, typically by shooting them from aircraft. About 270 were shot last year under the program and more than 1,300 have been killed since Congress' initial involvement. "Government agents killing wolves with shotguns from helicopters — that's not the model we had of conservation we had in mind," said Carolyn Sime, the head of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks' wolf program. "It took an act of Congress to direct the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to study reintroduction. Maybe that's fitting as a way to resolve this," she said Semper Fi !!!
10/8/2010 5:23:58 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
ben315 Boise, ID 41, joined Dec. 2008	I don't blame the wolves. I blame the idiots that brought them back. That being said we need to trap them in live traps than ship them to New Yorks central park(or any other place where the enviromental wacos live) and turn them loose. I am sure there was once wolfs in central park at one time. I think that would be the fair thing to do. Than we can see what they say about them.
10/9/2010 7:20:36 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	Quote from ben315: I don't blame the wolves. I blame the idiots that brought them back. That being said we need to trap them in live traps than ship them to New Yorks central park(or any other place where the enviromental wacos live) and turn them loose. I am sure there was once wolfs in central park at one time. I think that would be the fair thing to do. Than we can see what they say about them. ben,thats a great idea,but I think it should go a little further than that.I think we should see that all the majore parks in the far left liberal citys get their fare share. Semper Fi !!!
10/9/2010 11:04:29 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
ben315 Boise, ID 41, joined Dec. 2008	Unfortnatly that will never happen though. I still think it is a load of crap they call them an endangered animal when there is plenty of them still in Canda. I also think there is a lot more of them in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, and now they are being seen is Oregon, than what the enviromentalists and the feds will ever admit to. The endangered speceies act was one of the biggest mistakes that has done a lot of damage to the rural states. Untill then keep your guns loaded!!!
10/9/2010 1:24:29 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	Quote from ben315: Unfortnatly that will never happen though. I still think it is a load of crap they call them an endangered animal when there is plenty of them still in Canda. I also think there is a lot more of them in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, and now they are being seen is Oregon, than what the enviromentalists and the feds will ever admit to. The endangered speceies act was one of the biggest mistakes that has done a lot of damage to the rural states. Untill then keep your guns loaded!!! Well you can place blame on the tree huggers and moron groups like P.E.T.A.that have no clue what it's like to have these animals running around in peoples backyards trying to get at their house pets or kids or having to wonder how many of your stock has been killed by a marauding bunch of wolves that kill for the fun of it. I still say kill all of them. Semper Fi !!!
10/19/2010 10:29:43 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	Mt Gov Switzer should jump on this band wagon. BOISE, Idaho – After talks with the federal government collapsed, Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter ordered Idaho wildlife managers Monday to relinquish their duty to arrest poachers or to even investigate when wolves are killed illegally. Otter rejected the wolf management Idaho has conducted for years as the federal government's "designated agent" after a U.S. District Court judge in Montana returned wolves to Endangered Species Act protections earlier this year. This means Idaho Department of Fish and Game managers will no longer perform statewide monitoring for wolves, conduct investigations into illegal killings, provide law enforcement when wolves are poached or participate in a program that responds to livestock depredations. In an angry letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, the Republican governor said withdrawing from wolf management will keep Idaho hunters and their money from subsidizing the federal program. Otter accused the federal government of foisting wolves upon Idaho — he calls them "your wolves" — and promised to quickly submit plans asking for special permission to kill dozens of wolves to protect big game herds. "History will show that this program was a tragic example of oppressive, ham-handed 'conservation' at its worst," Otter wrote. "Idahoans have suffered this intolerable situation for too long, but starting today at least the state no longer will be complicit." It's unclear just how wolves will be managed now; between 1995 and 2005, the Nez Perce Tribe in north-central Idaho managed Idaho's predators, before the state stepped in. Keith Lawrence, a Nez Perce wolf manager, didn't immediately return a phone call. U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula restored Endangered Species Act protections following a lawsuit from environmentalists who argued Idaho and Montana wolves could not be under state control while Wyoming wolves remained under federal control. With Molloy's ruling in August, Idaho and Montana have had to cancel public hunts, something that's especially irked Otter. He contends the first legal harvest that started in 2009 and ended earlier this year demonstrated that states could manage wolves responsibly. Republican U.S. Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo separately have introduced a bill that aims to exempt wolves in Idaho from federal protections that were restored by Molloy's order. The wolver were wiped out for good reason.I say do it again. Semper Fi !!!
10/19/2010 6:58:26 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
juice_88 Missoula, MT 29, joined Jun. 2010	The wolves were illegally introduced by the Fed, they are currently trying to take control of the situation that should be in Montana's hands. Idaho has declared they will no longer follow the ESA concerning wolf management. I feel the wolves are a majestic animal but they do need to eat. Wolves will grow in number but our elk have been farmed for so long that the herds cannot support both human consumption as well as a healthy wolf population. The wolves will go after ranch's and start passing on the outskirts of the towns and cities, wolves travel a great distance each day. I say we as a State take control of the issue, Montana exceeds in wildlife management and Californians and New Yorkers don't need to have a say. I like the wolves but the possibility of a large population is no longer a likely option i feel.
10/21/2010 8:00:56 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cookinwho Shelley, ID 54, joined Jun. 2010	Quote from wolfchild: I camp in the Big Horn Mountains and there is a wolf pack that has come to know me, my smell and can sense my good heart. these animals are not vicious killers as they are quite selective, only killing the weak,injured and old. I think that wolves should remain unharmed as they are needed in the chain of life. the wolf pack that I know loves me and would never harm me; in fact when I was homeless and had to camp in the mountains for a long period the wolves were my protectors, sleeping every night in the light of my camp fire. I have never felt safer, I know in my heart that these beautiful animals really know when someone is out to hurt them or leave them in peace.Every year I camp in the same location and every year the same wolf pack comes to my tent,takes a sniff and knows who I am, I love them dearly and to see them harmed in any way would be like losing my beloved dog.I Love My Wolves! Bull . . . What have you been smokin'???
10/21/2010 8:03:57 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cookinwho Shelley, ID 54, joined Jun. 2010	Quote from tileman1814: Mt Gov Switzer should jump on this band wagon. BOISE, Idaho – After talks with the federal government collapsed, Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter ordered Idaho wildlife managers Monday to relinquish their duty to arrest poachers or to even investigate when wolves are killed illegally. Otter rejected the wolf management Idaho has conducted for years as the federal government's "designated agent" after a U.S. District Court judge in Montana returned wolves to Endangered Species Act protections earlier this year. This means Idaho Department of Fish and Game managers will no longer perform statewide monitoring for wolves, conduct investigations into illegal killings, provide law enforcement when wolves are poached or participate in a program that responds to livestock depredations. In an angry letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, the Republican governor said withdrawing from wolf management will keep Idaho hunters and their money from subsidizing the federal program. Otter accused the federal government of foisting wolves upon Idaho — he calls them "your wolves" — and promised to quickly submit plans asking for special permission to kill dozens of wolves to protect big game herds. "History will show that this program was a tragic example of oppressive, ham-handed 'conservation' at its worst," Otter wrote. "Idahoans have suffered this intolerable situation for too long, but starting today at least the state no longer will be complicit." It's unclear just how wolves will be managed now; between 1995 and 2005, the Nez Perce Tribe in north-central Idaho managed Idaho's predators, before the state stepped in. Keith Lawrence, a Nez Perce wolf manager, didn't immediately return a phone call. U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula restored Endangered Species Act protections following a lawsuit from environmentalists who argued Idaho and Montana wolves could not be under state control while Wyoming wolves remained under federal control. With Molloy's ruling in August, Idaho and Montana have had to cancel public hunts, something that's especially irked Otter. He contends the first legal harvest that started in 2009 and ended earlier this year demonstrated that states could manage wolves responsibly. Republican U.S. Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo separately have introduced a bill that aims to exempt wolves in Idaho from federal protections that were restored by Molloy's order. The wolver were wiped out for good reason.I say do it again. Semper Fi !!! There ya go . . . There ya go . . . These shots were taken just three miles out from the city of Ashton . . . that is my foot . .
10/22/2010 11:42:56 AM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
tileman1814 Kalispell, MT 67, joined Nov. 2007 online now!	The people that don't live near the aeras that have wolves have no idea what they can do.The longer we waite to get rid of them the more problems there will be.Sooner or later they will be comming right into town because nobody will be alowed to kill them so they will have no fear of people.Thats when the fun will really start.They will go from killing livestock to killing peoples pets or worst yet their kids.If you think I'm over stating this just mark my words. Semper Fi !!!
10/22/2010 1:08:41 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cookinwho Shelley, ID 54, joined Jun. 2010	Yes they will. Just this week there were three cougar sightings in town. Every year there are numerous bear sightings and schools shut down around here. The wolves will be no different. Those prints were on a well traveled road not far at all from town and it was a fairly large pack judging by the different sized prints. They already don't fear humans enough to stay up. The evidence is clear so why not allow us to manage the problem through the vehicles that are known to work?
10/22/2010 8:47:33 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
willu65 Pocatello, ID 57, joined Apr. 2010	well for one thing they should be introduced on the us mexico boarder where there is more for them to eat and then all the skid rows need a bunch and lets not forget about washington dc they could clean up nicely their
10/22/2010 10:17:13 PM	Whats your take on the wolf problem.
cookinwho Shelley, ID 54, joined Jun. 2010	Quote from willu65: well for one thing they should be introduced on the us mexico boarder where there is more for them to eat and then all the skid rows need a bunch and lets not forget about washington dc they could clean up nicely their Excellent idea!! Spread them out everywhere so that all of the US can appreciate their beauty!! NOT!!!

hookup billings mt

real free hookup sites