Entire wolf pack to be exterminated

Adam Khor

http://www.care2.com/causes/death-sentence-issued-for-entire-pack-of-endangered-wolves.html



I'm starting to think there may not be a future for wolves in the US if things continue this way.

Mickeroo

Yeah I heard about this, they've already killed 2 of the wolves afaik. At least they're still listed as endangered in that state, so hopefully wolves from neighbouring areas will take over the pack's territory.

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah I heard about this, they've already killed 2 of the wolves afaik. At least they're still listed as endangered in that state, so hopefully wolves from neighbouring areas will take over the pack's territory.

But what will stop these ppl from killing the new wolves as well? Kinda pointless having them in the endangered list if they can still be killed as soon as they attack cattle...

Mickeroo

Adam Khor wrote: »

But what will stop these ppl from killing the new wolves as well? Kinda pointless having them in the endangered list if they can still be killed as soon as they attack cattle...

Well I thought the wolves going for cattle was a pretty rare occurence so was hoping any new pack may not do that. I don't agree with the cull in the first place just to be clear.

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

Well I thought the wolves going for cattle was a pretty rare occurence so was hoping any new pack may not do that. I don't agree with the cull in the first place just to be clear.

Problem is, if these wolves were going for cattle it may be because said cattle was either easy to capture (free ranging or without sufficient protection) or because wild prey- deer, whatever- is too scarce in the area and the wolves are going hungry. If this is the case, then whatever wolves return to this place will probably go for cattle as well.

recedite

It seems a bit odd that they allow livestock to graze the National Park, and then allow wolves in too. The outcome was inevitable.

OpenYourEyes

Would there have been any sense in taking the pack into captivity, like into a zoo or something similar? Or are there already enough wolves in captivitiy like that as it is?

Mickeroo

recedite wrote: »

It seems a bit odd that they allow livestock to graze the National Park, and then allow wolves in too. The outcome was inevitable.

I think it's a national forest rather than a national park, but I don't see why the wolves should be punished if the livestock wasn't on private farmland when it was attacked. Going by the article the farmer in question was unco-operative in taking other measures to prevent predation, I would be interested to see that investigated further.

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think it's a national forest rather than a national park, but I don't see why the wolves should be punished if the livestock wasn't on private farmland when it was attacked. Going by the article the farmer in question was unco-operative in taking other measures to prevent predation, I would be interested to see that investigated further.

It reminds me of something that happened in Spain- may still be happening-, that vultures are attacking live cattle because farmers are burning the carcasses of their dead sheep/cows etc leaving the vultures nothing to eat (as the wild animals have been decimated there is not enough "wild carrion" to keep them well fed).
I remember that, before, they used to have these "vulture restaurants" in which they would dump the dead animals for the vultures to eat, and when they were doing this the vultures didn´t attack livestock at all.

Not saying they should open a "wolf restaurant", but rather my point is that there ARE other solutions than extermination.

The numbers of the top predator will always correspond to the available food supply, with a certain time lag. At some point they will exceed it leading to reduced infant survival or increased migration or both. If wolves are killing farm animals its probably a sign that they their numbers in that location are excessive. Feeding them artificially (with food other than farm animals) will merely increase the wolf population further.

Adam Khor

Deleted User wrote: »

The numbers of the top predator will always correspond to the available food supply, with a certain time lag. At some point they will exceed it leading to reduced infant survival or increased migration or both. If wolves are killing farm animals its probably a sign that they their numbers in that location are excessive. Feeding them artificially (with food other than farm animals) will merely increase the wolf population further.

That's why I said Im not suggesting feeding them- just saying there are other options other than killing them.

Im not sure if more wolves equal excessive numbers. In many places of the world, the problem is not even direct hunting of the predators but the depletion of their natural prey. In some south east Asian countries, tigers are protected but people hunts wild boar and deer in such numbers that tigers have serious trouble to find enough food (and to compete with say, leopards, which can survive on smaller prey).
In Mexico, cougars, jaguars and coyotes prey on cattle because white tailed deer and peccary are overhunted by humans. So attacks on cattle do not necessarily mean there's too many predators.

Mickeroo

I don't think excessive numbers of wolves are the problem, thats the only pack in the area afaik. Also the US wolf population was something like 2 million about a 100 years ago if I'm not mistaken?

recedite

Deleted User wrote: »

If wolves are killing farm animals its probably a sign that they their numbers in that location are excessive.

I think that would only apply if the wolves were coming into farmsteads and taking animals. The solution then would be to shoot the individual wolves that developed the raiding habit.
But if the guy is dropping off his livestock at the National Forest or National Park, whatever it is, you can't expect the wolves in the forest not to see them as food.
It reminds me of a few places like Sally Gap in the Wicklow Mountains and the Curragh in Kildare where traffic speeds and volumes have increased, but farmers traditionally leave their sheep unattended for the free grazing, ie they have commonage rights. The sheep wander around on the roads and in recent years they have been losing more and more to traffic accidents. The farmers complain, but they still do it. Essentially, the free grazing means its still economical, despite the losses. The difference I suppose, is that you're not allowed to shoot motorists.