Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Absolutely NOT irrelevant. The deer killed by wolves will save way more than enough human lives in Deer-Vehicle-Accidents than the one or two (per 1/2 millennium) that they will taste test. So, overall, wolves will save human lifesavers. They probably deserve Presidential Awards of some sort for this important heroism.
I'd take on a pack of seven pomeranians any day, even bare handed.Domestic dogs share DNA with wolves. I don’t care what type of Dog it is, a pack of any seven canines are dangerous to any person or animal. Just like a pack of seven young unmarried human males are just as dangerous. If confronted by either you better kill the alpha ASAP and have a firearm and extra ammunition.
You can go off some people, what a dream job you have, those photos are superb.If I remember right, the first pic with me and the grey and the last two of the black one were from NW of Dillon. The other black and one of the grays was between Livingston and Gardiner and the rest were caught on the front range of the Boulder and Rosebud areas. I really need to make a trip down that way this winter. We caught wolves on public land in the same two spots in Paradise Valley three years in a row. Would be way easier hunting them there than what I am used to up this way!
AND I FEEL THE GREAT LAKE NUMBERS ARE UNDER ESTIMATED HERE AS WELL, THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE THE NUMBERS ANY HIGHER DUE TO THE TARGET NUMBERS FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT TARGETSPretty sure there’s more wolves than that in Wyoming. They like to under estimate the wolf population for some reason, while over estimating the deer population. Doesn’t do them any good either,- less wolves=more deer=more deer tags for the game and fish. But they lowered the wolf quota this year, I assume because they want to see less elk and deer and moose(whatever’s left of the moose).
You might have swerved into something jr.....Non-native Polish wolves brought in by PETA under Agenda 21 to end pet ownership as we know it. Wake up people.
All this yelling makes my head hurt!AND I FEEL THE GREAT LAKE NUMBERS ARE UNDER ESTIMATED HERE AS WELL, THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE THE NUMBERS ANY HIGHER DUE TO THE TARGET NUMBERS FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT TARGETS
AND I FEEL THE GREAT LAKE NUMBERS ARE UNDER ESTIMATED HERE AS WELL, THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE THE NUMBERS ANY HIGHER DUE TO THE TARGET NUMBERS FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT TARGETS
My neighbors may feel the same way about mine - that little bastard barks at everything outside. Love him though.
View attachment 122328View attachment 122329View attachment 122330
I'd take on a pack of seven pomeranians any day, even bare handed.
i was referring to usfs, not so much the states as far as estimates. the cap lock are because I am working in another program that used caps and I am lazy.The states want management of wolves. Why would they purposely underestimate numbers to keep them listed? Minnesota's stated population estimates are 2-3 times the recovery goal. If we wanted to keep them listed, shouldn't our stated population be below the recovery threshold? FYI, typing in all caps does not make your argument any more valid.
Alright fellas I forgot about the poodle, teacup and toy class of dogs. Hahaha I mostly think of those dogs as rodents. I am mostly talking feral varieties of the working, hound, bull, and hunting dog breeds. Which once feral can be just as dangerous as wolves.
Yep!Let Ron Swanson be your guide here.
Sounds like somebody has spent enough time watching Westminster. Time for some fresh tracksAlright fellas I forgot about the poodle, teacup and toy class of dogs. Hahaha I mostly think of those dogs as rodents. I am mostly talking feral varieties of the working, hound, bull, and hunting dog breeds. Which once feral can be just as dangerous as wolves.
When your reading population estimates for certain species of game, you might take notice of certain comments like: " Minimum number counted" or "Estimate added to minimum numbers"AND I FEEL THE GREAT LAKE NUMBERS ARE UNDER ESTIMATED HERE AS WELL, THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE THE NUMBERS ANY HIGHER DUE TO THE TARGET NUMBERS FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT TARGETS