EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:37 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:34 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
I've googled for 15 min. looking for Dr. Mech with regard to this proposed Bush Administration wolf cull to no avail. I am wondering now why Donnie even mentioned him? He's not in either article, let alone quoted.

Yes he helped re-introduce the wolf populations, and knows a great deal about wolves. Still am perplexed why Donnie mentioned him here, as a proponent of this cull. Maybe he can shed some light on that by posting a link where Dr. Mech is calling for the cull. Apparently he posted the wrong links here.


http://www.davemech.org/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:38 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Grace wrote:
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Grace wrote:
In other words, you're blowing air out your pie hole with nothing to back it up. No answer is answer enough. ARA's? Disease? Ecosystems?? :roll:



No Grace. What I stated is you are not worth the effort because you refuse to weigh the truth. Dr. Mech is the creator of the recovery program that worked rather well and he understands the ecosystem well enough to note that a cull is now needed.



Does Dr. Mech work for the Bush Administration? I see no mention of him in your links, not to mention any of his comments re: ecosystem vis a vis the wolf cull.



That is because you don't have the common sense to note who developed recovery program and that Mech noted that a cull was imminent in the recovery planning when numbers hit certain marks. They passed those high water marks 4 years ago. Now eat your milk and cookies and go to bed or offer a more sincere adult approach to this discussion Grace.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:38 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
I'll be sending this letter off today and signing the petition.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeacti ... 12868#body


Stop Wolf Killing in the Northern Rockies!

Dear [Decision Maker],

I am writing to express my deep opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s plan to remove gray wolves from the federal Endangered Species List. The federal action would allow the states of Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana to kill 1200 of the 1500 wolves remaining in the northern Rockies and push the species back towards extinction.

The Wyoming Plan allows anyone to kill any wolf that wanders outside a small area in the northwest corner of the state. The plan would even target animals that live for most of the year in Yellowstone National Park but only wander out in the winter in search of food. Scientists have already warned that a few thousand wolves are necessary to ensure the long-term survival of the species, but the Bush administration has chosen to ignore the science and a solid majority of Americans who support wolf recovery efforts. The administration has even developed a contingency plan that will allow most of the current northern Rockies wolf population to be killed even if lawsuits are successful in keeping wolves on the endangered species list.

A 2006 study by the University of Montana found that wolves in Yellowstone bring $35 million tourism dollars to the local economy each year, yielding more than $70 million in added benefit to communities in the northern Rockies. More importantly, the park’s natural balance has been restored because wolves prevent an overpopulation of elk and deer from overgrazing vegetation and threatening the health of streams and creeks.

I urge you to join Congressman Nick Rahall and several of his congressional colleagues in urging the Secretary of the Interior to stop these unwarranted actions to promote senseless wolf killing. Wolves are an integral part of the northern Rockies and plans to kill most of them in the region would be a huge setback to years of wolf recovery.

[Your comment here]

Sincerely,
[Your name]
[Your address]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:44 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7959
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
Grace wrote:
I've googled for 15 min. looking for Dr. Mech with regard to this proposed Bush Administration wolf cull to no avail. I am wondering now why Donnie even mentioned him? He's not in either article, let alone quoted.

Yes he helped re-introduce the wolf populations, and knows a great deal about wolves. Still am perplexed why Donnie mentioned him here, as a proponent of this cull. Maybe he can shed some light on that by posting a link where Dr. Mech is calling for the cull. Apparently he posted the wrong links here.


http://www.davemech.org/



And I posted links before to Mech's notation about culling wolves but you Ignored them as much as I am ignoring you Grace. You just aren't worth the effort. You would rather play with defenders of Wildlife who had no input into recovery.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:47 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Grace
Quote:
Does Dr. Mech work for the Bush Administration? I see no mention of him in your links, not to mention any of his comments re: ecosystem vis a vis the wolf cull.



Donnie
Quote:
That is because you don't have the common sense to note who developed recovery program and that Mech noted that a cull was imminent in the recovery planning when numbers hit certain marks. They passed those high water marks 4 years ago. Now eat your milk and cookies and go to bed or offer a more sincere adult approach to this discussion Grace.


I see, it's just something he said way back when? Should be easy for you to quote his predictions then, even though they have nothing to do with this article! Maybe he did get a job with the Bush Administration?

And your title "Dr. David Mech is cow dung" was just something nasty to throw out there and blame the ARA's for, when the groups in the lawsuit aren't even ARA's, nor is anyone chastising him. Is Dr. Mech mentioned in ANY OF YOUR LINKS? No. You're full of sour milk and buggy cookies yourself Donnie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:48 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:49 pm
Posts: 7554
Location: England
No Grace. What I stated is [color=#FF0000]you are not worth the effort because you refuse to weigh the truth. Dr. Mech is the creator of the recovery program that worked rather well and he understands the ecosystem well enough to note that a cull is now needed.
[/color][/quote]


Does Dr. Mech work for the Bush Administration? I see no mention of him in your links, not to mention any of his comments re: ecosystem vis a vis the wolf cull.[/quote]


That is because [color=#FF0000]you don't have the common sense to note who developed recovery program and that Mech noted that a cull was imminent in the recovery planning when numbers hit certain marks. They passed those high water marks 4 years ago. Now eat your milk and cookies and go to bed or offer a more sincere adult approach to this discussion Grace. [/color][/quote]
******************
IMO you are very rude and dismissive Donnie. Not at all like the Donnie I came to respect of late. I see you have had similar comments aimed at you...but I wrongly thought you were 'above' that kind of thing. How wrong I was !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:48 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Grace wrote:
I've googled for 15 min. looking for Dr. Mech with regard to this proposed Bush Administration wolf cull to no avail. I am wondering now why Donnie even mentioned him? He's not in either article, let alone quoted.

Yes he helped re-introduce the wolf populations, and knows a great deal about wolves. Still am perplexed why Donnie mentioned him here, as a proponent of this cull. Maybe he can shed some light on that by posting a link where Dr. Mech is calling for the cull. Apparently he posted the wrong links here.


http://www.davemech.org/



And I posted links before to Mech's notation about culling wolves but you Ignored them as much as I am ignoring you Grace. You just aren't worth the effort. You would rather play with defenders of Wildlife who had no input into recovery.



No, I'm just calling you on your inconsistencies Donnie. In this thread, in these links, there is no Dr. Mech, no ARA's, no disease, no ecosytem. [-X


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:59 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Donnie
Quote:
The Former, Wolf Expert whom, the ARA were so proud of because his plan was for wolf recovery to to work, is now being ridiculed by former supporters for suggesting wolf numbers need to be culled to maintain healthy packs and ecosystems.


Where? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:00 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21390
Location: Southeastern US
Grace wrote:
In other words, you're blowing air out your pie hole with nothing to back it up. No answer is answer enough. ARA's? Disease? Ecosystems?? :roll:


I believe Donnie is just pointing out this quote works well in this case ...

Grace wrote:

Didn't read the rest of your tiresome quibbling. I am done with this p!ssing contest which could go on for days if I don't snap out of it and realize this is what you DO.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:11 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
and I see you're spreading anti AR prop all over the internet. One of several posts... See bolded section. Where is he being VILLIFIED? Where has he suggested a CULL vis a vis the Bush Administration? Geez Donnie if you would just post the proper link this discussion could be over.


Donnie Mac Leod wrote:

Strange thing about this Wolf issue. Dr. David Mech was considered the darling of Wolf culture because he was one of the initial movers and shakers in resupplying wolves into their former home ranges. His stature to the Wolf people was almost godly in nature. He was classed as the resident WOLF EXPERT in most wolf support groups. However now that he notes the wolf population is becoming to over abundant & has suggested a cull so he is vilified like the demons of hell are driving his message. Dr. Mech is was and will be a very strong supporter of wolves but he also is a pragmatic realist that knows the greatest danger to wolves is no control measures to keep the wolf packs healthy. The disconnect that some folks have from nature is quite obscene when you place it beside Dr. Mech's real connect to nature. He has made a life for himself and wolf recovery at the wolf expert level which he honesty earned for himself. Yet those who formerly gave him godlike status as a Wolf expert have become the vocal naysayers with regards to his pragmatism reality towards wolves better health and they will destroy that which he rebuilt in Wolf recovery


http://www.topix.com/us/2008/01/new-fed ... wolves/p18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:53 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:08 pm
Posts: 692
Location: Montana
Grace,

I live right in the heart of wolf country. This Bush Admin rule is a way to circumvent the delisting process. Wolves are schedule to be delisted next month I believe. That means control over wolf populations will be handed over to the states. Which means that the states of Wyoming Montana and Idaho will set regular hunting season's and bag limits that will be approved by the US FWS. Wyoming management plans until recently have not been approved. Delisting wouldn't occur until all 3 states plans were acceptable. I don't know the current status, but assume Wyoming's now in compliance, if indeed they are going ahead with delisting.

Wyoming's holdup stems from deep seated hatred of predators in general, not unlike Donnies. They would prefer to have free reign to kill any wolf, any time. I believe this Bush culling rule, which to my knowledge has few restrictions, much less than required by general hunting regulations, comes at the request of Wyoming to undercut and disrupt, the delisting process. It gives them a legal way to achieve their goals of knocking wolf numbers way down. It should be and is rightfully being opposed.

For all of Donnies rants about stewardship, ecology, balance of nature, he sure spews hostility whenever the subject turns to predators. I find it very phony, if not very unbalanced for someone who espouses balance in all things natural. I'm 50 miles from Yellowstone and they had to extend the hunting season on elk this year because the populations were so high ... go figure. He's so full of hot air, I wish I had the time to call him out on his dung more often.

Ock

_________________
"...To hunt means to have the land around you like clothing" Barry Lopez


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 7:01 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Ockham wrote:
Grace,

I live right in the heart of wolf country. This Bush Admin rule is a way to circumvent the delisting process. Wolves are schedule to be delisted next month I believe. That means control over wolf populations will be handed over to the states. Which means that the states of Wyoming Montana and Idaho will set regular hunting season's and bag limits that will be approved by the US FWS. Wyoming management plans until recently have not been approved. Delisting wouldn't occur until all 3 states plans were acceptable. I don't know the current status, but assume Wyoming's now in compliance, if indeed they are going ahead with delisting.

Wyoming's holdup stems from deep seated hatred of predators in general, not unlike Donnies. They would prefer to have free reign to kill any wolf, any time. I believe this Bush culling rule, which to my knowledge has few restrictions, much less than required by general hunting regulations, comes at the request of Wyoming to undercut and disrupt, the delisting process. It gives them a legal way to achieve their goals of knocking wolf numbers way down. It should be and is rightfully being opposed.

For all of Donnies rants about stewardship, ecology, balance of nature, he sure spews hostility whenever the subject turns to predators. I find it very phony, if not very unbalanced for someone who espouses balance in all things natural. I'm 50 miles from Yellowstone and they had to extend the hunting season on elk this year because the populations were so high ... go figure. He's so full of hot air, I wish I had the time to call him out on his dung more often.

Ock


Ock,

Good to see you. I also wish you had the time to call him out more often, but you'd need to be here 24/7 :lol: . Appreciate and respect your informed point of view.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:09 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 21390
Location: Southeastern US
The problem with the wolf population would be easier to determine in the local area as opposed to a few thousand miles away. As Donnie pointed out, the initial plan indicated there would be a need for culling of the wolves at some point if they recovered. The point Ock targeted is the disagreement over where the point of recovery requiring a cull may lie.

The articles do not make it clear the target point of 300 is more closely defined as the MINIMUM recovery target number. Thus, the wolf population is some four times the minimum number. That would by definition allow some level of culling, which currently occurs when wolves are removed for killing livestock, etc. On the other side is those who, as Ock points out think the only good wolf is a dead wolf. This turns into a polarized discussion very quickly where the conservationists want to err on the side of caution to offset the folks who would take the wolf populaiton to the bare minimum level. The question Donnie raised was the probable ignorance of the initial information in opposing the delisting, but which was not the true cause for concern on their part. The loss of control of the population to those who would only allow the minimal levels is the reason for the opposition.

Politics not actual science is the issue and Ock should have made that clear in his response.

http://environment.newscientist.com/cha ... nsive.html

Fortunately, that doesn't mean there is a threat of annihilation. There are 4000 wolves in the western Great Lakes population, well above the ESA's minimum recovery target of 1350. In the Rockies, meanwhile, there are now 1300 wolves, again exceeding that population's target of 300. "The animal is saved from extinction," says wolf biologist David Mech of the US Geological Survey and the University of Minnesota in St Paul.

The latter have a champion in the Republican governor of Idaho, C. L. "Butch" Otter. His state is home to about 650 wolves; he wants no more than the minimum of 100 under the federal recovery target. He also hopes to be the first to legally shoot a wolf in Idaho, as soon as the animals lose ESA protection.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:47 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:38 am
Posts: 16153
Location: Florida
The other point of contension is Dr Mech's role and prior acknowledgement and statement of the wolf culls in his plan, prior to the Bush Admin position, which has been provided in articles in a few other threads in the past on this board in support of Donnie's position and Dr. Mech's role.

None of this was about numbers..it is about who knew what and when they knew it or who said what and when they said it. Since he was responding to my question and he is aware I have read the other articles he posted in other threads. He was providing me with additional information not starting over from scratch and repeating what he had said or posted in prior conversations. He was also not spewing hostilites towards preditors in any way nor was that any point made in any of his statements or being discussed so that holds no bearing on this discussion. It is also not supported as he regularly provides food for preditors in is area which would contradicts that statement as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:16 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Who said it was about numbers?

My contention was Donnie's far-fetched, misleading and dishonest tale, the title of this thread, his claim that AR's are villifying Dr. Mech with the cow dung comment, mention of disease, ecosystem and perpetrating anti-AR prop vis a vis Dr. Mech who is not mentioned, nor quoted, in his link. Wayne's article with Dr. Mech's quote is dated 2007. And I still don't see anything which states Dr. Mech supports this present day proposal....

Donnie to jhawk with reference to Dr. Mech
Quote:
He now calls for a wolf cull because he understands that the issue is not recovery but health of packs and the entire ecosystem.


WHERE DID HE SAY THAT DONNIE? Not here. Not anywhere except in your mind. :roll: :roll: :roll:


Admin note: Post removed for personal attack.

Note from Grace: there was no post/personal attack. The emoticon with the stretching nose was used here by me and deleted by a mod. This emoticon was never deleted before on this board, but apparently it is now considered a personal attack and we weren't informed to disontinue its use. Can the mod can explain why we have it in the gallery and what context it is to be used??


Last edited by Grace on Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 48 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group