Six Gray Wolves in Washington Were Fatally Poisoned, Officials Say (NY Times)

Status
Not open for further replies.
FontinalisFin said:
Very disappointed with the lack of animal booty shots on that gram.
Click to expand...

New mission:. Wolves, Climate Change, and "Conservation"

In a recent survey only ten percent of WDFW employees hunt and or fish. Also in the same survey only ten percent are from Washington.

Of course that survey is fictional and straight out of my ass but it still doesn't mean it's wrong.
 
Chadk said:
Sure, but a huge difference... are we talking about piranhas in Lake WA? Otherwise simply apples and oranges. Steelhead aren't killing cattle and pets and treeing biologists.
Click to expand...
Although that would be totally badass. Steelhead capable of killing cattle and treeing biologists.
 
I would not take Francines's job for that money. Honestly, after reading a few wolf threads here, I am not sure that it really is anything more than combat pay. Seriously, I would be afraid that I was going to be shot. I'm actually not joking. Go to a hunting BB and read some wolf threads. It's tough for me to read. People really threaten some bad things.

Like Billy, I'd rather have more mammals to hunt and for others to hunt. However, unless we want to weigh hunters and select residents voices more based on their location, I'm not going to get my way. I guess that is the price we pay for representative democracy where individual humans have equal electoral power as we do on the state level. The thing that I find interesting is that we do weigh certain citizens votes more on a federal level based on geography. Even though a low population state's residents have greater representation nationally, it is a national law that drives the bus (ESA). Wyoming, Montana and Idaho have the majority of the wolves in he US and they have some of the lower population per representation in the country. So maybe it would not matter on the state level either.

It's interesting to how a wolf thread brings out people's political belief's that have little to do with wolves. It's fascinating. Maybe it gets to the question of "who do you trust" in the way that other wedge issues do. The vitriol that wolf threads bring is really over the top at times. It's like a bunch of men who have buried their emotions for years and have too many pops on Saturday afternoon watching football. All of a sudden, Dad is telling the whole family how he feels about everything that has bothered him because his team lost a football game.
 
charles sullivan said:
I would not take Francines's job for that money. Honestly, after reading a few wolf threads here, I am not sure that it really is anything more than combat pay. Seriously, I would be afraid that I was going to be shot. I'm actually not joking. Go to a hunting BB and read some wolf threads. It's tough for me to read. People really threaten some bad things.

Like Billy, I'd rather have more mammals to hunt and for others to hunt. However, unless we want to weigh hunters and select residents voices more based on their location, I'm not going to get my way. I guess that is the price we pay for representative democracy where individual humans have equal electoral power as we do on the state level. The thing that I find interesting is that we do weigh certain citizens votes more on a federal level based on geography. Even though a low population state's residents have greater representation nationally, it is a national law that drives the bus (ESA). Wyoming, Montana and Idaho have the majority of the wolves in he US and they have some of the lower population per representation in the country. So maybe it would not matter on the state level either.

It's interesting to how a wolf thread brings out people's political belief's that have little to do with wolves. It's fascinating. Maybe it gets to the question of "who do you trust" in the way that other wedge issues do. The vitriol that wolf threads bring is really over the top at times. It's like a bunch of men who have buried their emotions for years and have too many pops on Saturday afternoon watching football. All of a sudden, Dad is telling the whole family how he feels about everything that has bothered him because his team lost a football game.
Click to expand...
Men are supposed to bury our emotions and numb them with sports/outdoor/fishing/hunting/substance abuse... That's what makes us different then women. We need to stop taking away and or ruining these outlets of masculinity.

Francine did an amazing job of getting every hot button political issue into her mission statement and bio.
 
The % is very high, the guys whining the most about wolves have only seen a wolf at NW Trek or in a Kevin Costner movie.
 
FontinalisFin said:
Men are supposed to bury our emotions and numb them with sports/outdoor/fishing/hunting/substance abuse... That's what makes us different then women. We need to stop taking away and or ruining these outlets of masculinity.

Francine did an amazing job of getting every hot button political issue into her mission statement and bio.
Click to expand...
I did not find one thing in the portion of that bio that pushed a button for me. Honestly, it just seems like a bunch of words used to try to say that she specializes in getting conflicting sides to a point of agreement. It seemed a whole lot over the top, and it seems to promise everything to everyone but I did not see anything that pushed an emotional button for me. I'm not sure that I have the cahones to say that anything that I have done led to "institutional and societal changes, including increased social cohesion in otherwise divided societies, empowerment of marginalized communities, racial and gender equity, reduced criminality, and more inclusive and effective governance."
I guess it's go big or go home when you are trying to be the wolf czar. It's a ballsy bio, but I can't see anything that is a hot political button for me.
 
charles sullivan said:
I'm not sure that I have the cahones to say that anything that I have done led to "institutional and societal changes, including increased social cohesion in otherwise divided societies, empowerment of marginalized communities, racial and gender equity, reduced criminality, and more inclusive and effective governance."
Click to expand...
Pffft...I do that on a daily basis.
 
Chadk said:
Understood. Of course salmon and steelhead recovery is a controversial and complex topic and has it's own set of challenges and pros and cons. But it is apples and oranges compared to wolves. Fish are a resource we are struggling to maintain. Wolves are a burden to our resources.
Click to expand...
Sorry, disagree. It can all be reduced to opportunity cost and trade-off decisions.

A better example than the dam operator is the farmer who depends on salmon extirpating dams to irrigate income producing and people feeding crops. Food is a resource. Cheap food even more so. I doubt the farmers think of salmon as a resource more valuable than the food they produce. I'm sure they don't give a flying fuck about stupid steelhead that don't even taste good. The billboards on I5 in the Central Valley are pretty good evidence of what they think is a burden and a resource that people are struggling to maintain.

I don't agree with those farmers. But drawing some sort of hard line between salmon and wolves or marbled murrellets or elk or whatever is overly simplistic thinking.
 

To take this worldwide, in Nepal, tigers and elephant conservation is leading to increased populations of rare creatures, but at the cost of human lives, not just livestock.

"During the past decade, as tiger numbers rose, so did the toll of their human victims: At least 300 people in Nepal died due to tiger attacks in this period."

What holds in the future for all creatures as human population expands? Different countries, different tolerances.
 
Last edited:
charles sullivan said:
I did not find one thing in the portion of that bio that pushed a button for me. Honestly, it just seems like a bunch of words used to try to say that she specializes in getting conflicting sides to a point of agreement. It seemed a whole lot over the top, and it seems to promise everything to everyone but I did not see anything that pushed an emotional button for me. I'm not sure that I have the cahones to say that anything that I have done led to "institutional and societal changes, including increased social cohesion in otherwise divided societies, empowerment of marginalized communities, racial and gender equity, reduced criminality, and more inclusive and effective governance."
I guess it's go big or go home when you are trying to be the wolf czar. It's a ballsy bio, but I can't see anything that is a hot political button for me.
Click to expand...

Normal people don't talk like that. That is how the woke communicate. You can spot it a mile away.

I'm sure she's a lovely woman (if I can call her a woman) but the woke mentality can be boring and destructive. Among other things it can lead to censorship and cancel culture.

Oh wait, you currently have me on ignore. How ironic.
 
If this lady and her team have been hired to manage the conflict, can we use the fact that folks are now poisoning wolves as a benchmark to the success of the program?

And it does it make sense that if you are going to be the wolf czar, maybe get out of the DC bubble and actually live where there are wolves?
 
swimmy said:
Normal people don't talk like that. That is how the woke communicate. You can spot it a mile away.

I'm sure she's a lovely woman (if I can call her a woman) but the woke mentality can be boring and destructive. Among other things it can lead to censorship and cancel culture.

Oh wait, you currently have me on ignore. How ironic.
Click to expand...
I don't have you on ignore. I just generally don't take your bait, and I will not this time except to correct your lie.
 
swimmy said:
Normal people don't talk like that. That is how the woke communicate. You can spot it a mile away.

I'm sure she's a lovely woman (if I can call her a woman) but the woke mentality can be boring and destructive. Among other things it can lead to censorship and cancel culture.

Oh wait, you currently have me on ignore. How ironic.
Click to expand...

Boy full of the stereotypes - you wanna talk about censorship and so-called "cancel cuture" look at Florida, Texas, Virginia, banning books, free speech, etc., oh, and how about your own back yard - are you as exercised about that?

Screen Shot 2022-10-14 at 10.12.05 AM.png

_WW_ said:
Bullshit is not the sole property of "woke" people. You can pretty much find it in any collection of people that you wish to assign a label to.
Click to expand...

Correct, unfortunately, that requires looking into the mirror to understand or recognize that many of the folks you agree with are just as full of bullshit as many of the folks you disagree with.

Cheers
 
Gyrfalcon22 said:

To take this worldwide, in Nepal, tigers and elephant conservation is leading to increased populations of rare creatures, but at the cost of human lives, not just livestock.

"During the past decade, as tiger numbers rose, so did the toll of their human victims: At least 300 people in Nepal died due to tiger attacks in this period."

What holds in the future for all creatures as human population expands? Different countries, different tolerances.
Click to expand...
This makes me think of where I grew up in NH. Moose populations were rebounding when I lived there. It was great to see. I ate breakfast while wstching a bull feed for about 1 month during my senior year. He came out to eat on the wetland edge of an unused pasture. Very cool.
My sister had hit a moose a couple years earlier with a 1978 Nova. It took out the front and back windshields. Somehow she was ok. It must have been the height of the moose.
We repaired the windshields and I got to drive the car. In that same moose magnets car I came within 2 feet of hitting a small bull moose while going 90mph+ on a flat section of road. He had come trotting out from behind the trees. He saw me and stopped by splaying out his legs. He fell on the double yellow line. I flew by without ever having the chance to hit the brakes.
Closest to death I have ever come and I did not have a mark on me.
Living in and amongst nature has its own set of dangers. Sometimes there are no just or equitable solutions. At the same time, change is hard. Part of living in a pluralist society is dealing with people and groups who want change that may effect you negatively.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top