More Wolves

Saw this on the web, their getting farther south.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/2nd-pack-gray-wolves-spotted-northern-california-48463807

Mark

No comment

You should read the comments in the article.not very friendly to hunters and cattlemen. One so called hunter said he welcome the wolves into the area. The Ecco system is better with the dominant predator in it. I would only agree to that if we're the predator.

Our state animal is the grizzly...it's only a matter of time before they bring them back too. I would be fine with that, or even the wolves, as long as they target the feral horses as a primary food source! NOT going to happen!

I don't think most people understand the land can only hold so many preadators and it will all balance out.wolves move in there will be way less coyote, a few less bear and lions it's just the way it works.Before white man came to North America preadators were left uncontrolled for thousands of years and guess what, there were still deer,elk and antelope when white man arrived.

>I don't think most people understand
>the land can only hold
>so many preadators and it
>will all balance out.wolves move
>in there will be way
>less coyote, a few less
>bear and lions it's just
>the way it works.Before white
>man came to North America
>preadators were left uncontrolled for
>thousands of years and guess
>what, there were still deer,elk
>and antelope when white man
>arrived.

I agree with everything you are saying and it will be interesting to see what effects the wolves have on coyotes.

The fear I have is that there is no way that they will ever be managed in CA, I think if left unmanaged a natural predator prey relationship is very volatile, if the prey population is doing well the predators will thrive until they decimate the prey then their population will get depleted, and the prey will eventually thrive and it starts over.

I guess we will just have to wait and see because unless they decide to leave on there own they are here to stay.

>The fear I have is that
>there is no way that
>they will ever be managed
>in CA, I think if
>left unmanaged a natural predator
>prey relationship is very volatile,
>if the prey population is
>doing well the predators will
>thrive until they decimate the
>prey then their population will
>get depleted, and the prey
>will eventually thrive and it
>starts over.

I whitetail hunted in ID from '03-'13, and when the wolves moved in and were protected and not managed, the elk herds were decimated, elk hunting is/was not the same. Now that they are managed, the elk are trying to make a comeback

>I don't think most people understand
>the land can only hold
>so many preadators and it
>will all balance out.wolves move
>in there will be way
>less coyote, a few less
>bear and lions it's just
>the way it works.Before white
>man came to North America
>preadators were left uncontrolled for
>thousands of years and guess
>what, there were still deer,elk
>and antelope when white man
>arrived.

It's true that there were still animals but the natives also hunted predators as well as deer/elk/antelope. And the landscape now is totally different now where hundreds of miles of roads and trails cris cross the forest making it much easier for them to hunt so the herds are more vulnerable. I don't think the majority of people want them exterminated but they should be managed and the problem is that the state won't allow it which breeds a shoot,shovel,and shut up attitude

My question is why weren't Canadian Grey wolves here before?

Rocky Mountain timber wolves were predominant in ID, MT, WY, etc. they introduced Canadian Grey wolves. Why weren't they already in the US?

My theory is they would eat themselves out of a food source.

My other theory is that (except in Kali) we'll prevail because hunting has become such a high dollar sport.

kalielkslayer wrote:

"My question is why weren't Canadian Grey wolves her before?"

"Canadian Grey" is a misnomer and used colloquially, sometimes causing a bit of confusion. The Gray Wolf (Canis Lupis) was in fact spread throughout the US before it's extirpation via subspecies of the Gray Wolf, including California. The actual subspecies inhabiting California isn't exact, but there were 'probably' at least 3 subspecies that roamed the state.

"Rocky Mountain timber wolves were predominant in ID, MT, WY, etc. they introduced Canadian Grey wolves. Why weren't they already in the US?"

Again, "Rocky Mountain timber wolf" is a misnomer. There are at least a couple subspecies that are 'commonly' referenced as "Timber Wolf". Perhaps you are referencing the Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf (Canis lupus irremotus), which roamed--as it's name states--areas of the northern rocky mountains, including California, along with other subspecies. And yes, they were in California before. The subspecies that was introduced into the YNP was the Mackenzie Valley Wolf (Canis lupus occidentalis), which is also referenced as 'timber wolf'.

The reason for introducing this particular subspecies is interesting, you might want to search it for future reference, but it is what it is.

I would prefer the wolf not repopulate California (and other states), but there is nothing to be done to stop it. As one of the previous posters stated, the only way to keep predators in check is for the state to manage that population, with hunting being the primary means of control. I sure don't see that happening in California either, given the political and population mind sets in general. As also mentioned in another post, with the cyclic roller coaster of un-managed predators, the predator/prey population dynamics would certainly ebb and flow, but wouldn't have the wolves eating themselves out of a food source.

Any way one looks at it, it's a pandora's box for hunters and our game animal populations, in one form or another.