BusterAZ

Funny! There looks to be a post you deleted about the wolf as an invasive species. Can you cite any genetic studies to this claim? Anyways, the machismo is getting even more hilarious.

Back to the name calling. I have provided several citations in links to this discussion. You keep muddying the waters in a poor attempt to vilify the wolf. I try to keep the thread on the topic of predator-prey interactions, but all you do is name call and ask derailing questions. This thread has long run it’s course, but we can continue on with this banter if you like! It is getting to be a little pathetic though.

Same old rerun 🤮 All you do is run your mouth with no citations or data to back a single thought! Again, you have no authority over my speech. I love how you think you can tell me “to run along”. Like you have any control at all other than retreading the same old false claims.

We have more in common than this statement alludes to. I’m not telling you to believe anything. Our own eyes are biased. Look at the data and let’s have a civil conversation. Additionally, my degrees do not make me elite; we all have the same right to free speech. I joined forum to engage and hopefully meet fellow hunters to share ideas and hopefully run the dogs together, fish, or hunt big game together.

It is hard for this thread to stay on topic without the hurling of insults or the excessive crying of “you didn’t answer this or that” The graph presented was a misunderstanding of data in order to blame the wolf exclusively for a much more ecologically complex situation. The above blanket statement about “pro wolf” people is clouded toward the interests of people who want more elk tags. We are all competing for a limited resource. That is fine, but don’t confuse the subject. I’ve backpacked into many fine places in the pursuit of native trout and wild game, so I base my opinions on my own observations and also analyze data collected by professionals. It is important to note that the cattle ranchers may not be the hunters greatest ally, since they were backing Thorpe’s anti hunting bills. If you are referring to the ecological concept of Trophic Cascade, then I’m all for having an intelligent conversation on the matter. Also, I’m aware of BHA, but don’t fly their banner 😉 Below is a well written article that does not give the wolf all of the credit, but eloquently explains the complex nature of an ecosystem. https://untamedscience.com/biology/ecology/ecology-articles/wolf-reintroduction-yellowstone/

I like this now! You want to childishly insult till one of us has the last word?

Yes! I’ve camped, fished, and hunted in the Apache Forest. I invite the howls while around the campfire. AZ is the first state I’ve heard wild wolves and I love that feeling of being in the wilderness! Nature is not nice! Wilderness is my happy place 🤠 I’m not the hunters enemy, because I am one. I’m also an avid fly fisherman and have seen what the absence of apex predators does to riparian areas.

Thank you again for using the same weak a$$ rebuttal and the bait and switch technique that has no backbone. I don’t need to measure the blanks with you and your ilk! We go on with WRONG and all that lame talk, but you’re guilty of all the charges you weakly attempt to place on me.

There you go again! I didn’t acknowledge any of your babble!

Please do not display the ignorance of assuming my acknowledgment to anything that I didn’t say specifically. The data doesn’t lie, people do! Here’s one that will blow your mind- https://fuelgreatminds.com/data-doesnt-lie-people/ Now if I was a teacher, I’d never bring politics into the classroom, such as the lesson in the link. I would never disrespect a sitting president! That being said, this guy explains data and the manipulation of it very well! This is misquoted and was a response to gunsmith.

Science works on what the data shows. The 6th graders are actually using data from the field to analyze trends. It may sound funny that they are being taught using authentic data, but many other parents and I think it’s great! Please read the science standards link I posted for more info. Let’s step back to the original post. I think the discussion of the graph presented has run its course. Thank you for your time and perspective 😀

How about bringing something of substance to the table? I love the grammar police here!

Getting a little person dude! The science teacher has a Masters degree and they are learning about ecosystems right now. They are actually analyzing data about wolf introductions this week. I’ve looked it over and know the validity of the data due to my background in environmental biology. I carry several advanced science degrees. What about you?

https://cms.azed.gov/home/GetDocumentFile?id=5bd338e11dcb250184c8cf04 I do have more faith in the education system than you and trust the professionals that work with my child. That being said, I understand that our state’s K-12 is the most poorly funded state education system in the union, so I can appreciate your concerns with it. Moreover, I take an active role in my child’s education and have a good relationship with all her teachers. Lastly, I know some areas are worse off than the school district my child is in.

Fittest in evolutionary terms does not always mean the strongest. The fittest elk could be one that behaviors differently like staying in cover more vs wide open spaces. Also, predatory influences affect fittest, so it could also be faster elk that is more fit in your scenario. Furthermore, it could well become the elk that are more resistant to CWD that are more. These are all hypotheticals, of course!

Bill Nye has a degree in mechanical engineering from Cornell. May I ask what degrees you hold? In 6th grade, ecology and climate change are taught at a deeper level of understanding than discussed here. Your comment is proof we failed to properly educate previous generations.

Thanks for the spelling check for themselves 😩 Do you have any real evidence that refutes those claims?

People that argue with Science are only fooling themselves. Ecology is a universal science and has been fact checked on various continents and nothing like politics in this country. Capitalists paid off politicians to push phony science and/or discredit valid scientific studies in favor of business profits. A concept like Tropic Cascade or the importance of apex predators in ecological terms are studied on various populations and have been reproduced with similar results. Almost all elk herds in the lower 48 are managed at population levels in favor of sport hunting instead of numbers that are lower and healthier for the ecosystem as a whole. This is the NA model of game management in a nutshell shell- create reliable populations that can sustain annual harvests by humans.

Selective data mining was the chart fine sir! Here is a RMEF statement explaining the situation:

While predation by wolves cannot be discounted, it is not the main factor that caused this population decline. Wolves were reintroduced in 1995 and that handful didn’t make substantial kills to this herd for several years. The major environmental factors that caused the elk herd decline was the succession of meadows into forest and harsh winters. The 1996-97 decline was the result of winter kill and not the dozen wolves that were reintroduced. This data is cherry picked to provide a false narrative. Furthermore, the wolf population in this area has been reduced for several years without any elk population rebound. The data points to habitat as the main culprit. Elk don’t have nearly as many food sources in a mature forest as meadow areas. The previously large herds in this region can be attributed to post burn ecosystem that had more food sources for the elk. Essentially, the forest matured and preferred food sources (grasses, shrubs, etc) were choked out by the forest canopy. Below is a link explaining the severity of these historic fires, which kickstarted the secondary succession in this region. https://foresthistory.org/research-explore/us-forest-service-history/policy-and-law/fire-u-s-forest-service/famous-fires/the-1910-fires/

Late season quail has been tough for me. I’m finding a lot of rabbit and a few jacks out in 24b, but quail have been few and far between. Only found two small coveys. I might need to find new areas.

I have HAM 22, but wish I had 24b tag, because I’ve been seeing a lot of deer and javelina while quail hunting down there!

I’ve shot my 357 revolver without plugs and will not do it again, unless it is an emergency. That being said, I intend to hunt with it, so I’ll have plugs in when stalking. I wanted to bump this thread to see if anyone could recommend a smaller revolver to carry while bird hunting just in case the dog gets into it with a coyote or other varmint.

The problem with this regulation is that it is loosely defined terminology. There are YouTube videos showing state employees dropping packs with lead to jump tanks. This is their interpretation of the law, but I just use upland steel loads, which are only about a dollar a box more than the cheap lead game loads. Another interesting caveat is the AZ regulation specifies lead shot either loose or in a shell. So you could have lead slugs in your possession and be fine. Modern steel game loads preform great. Texas studied lead vs steel shot dove loads in a large-scale analysis and concluded that lead gave no advantage in harvest rate or lethality for dove hunting. Personally, the new offerings from Kent and Federal are working great this season for both dove and quail. As for cranes, I have yet to have the privilege, but would load up with Boss Bismuth #2 if I score a tag in the future.

Those that hunt with a handgun, what ammo do you use? I will be using a 357 Revolver with a 6 in barrel this upcoming season and was looking for recommendations on which grain size to use. Also, any belt/pack holster recommendations would be greatly appreciated.