MattMan Report post Posted December 26, 2011 Anybody else notice the change on page 33 of the '12 regs for elk/antelope? The beginning of the end.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted December 26, 2011 if folks don't wise up, it is. Lark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Jonathan Report post Posted December 26, 2011 At least they'll eat the lions too. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Arizona Griz Report post Posted December 26, 2011 The sky is falling, the sky is falling ....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThomC Report post Posted December 26, 2011 triple S program 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dcshorthairs Report post Posted December 27, 2011 Got news for ya, thAt map is incorrect. I know for sure there are mexican grays north of I40. G and f was trying to remove a female that relocated from new mexico to here north of where we live. But what really does the map change. They are gonna do what they want regardless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattMan Report post Posted December 27, 2011 Just trying to keep people informed, the map seems a subtle change, but it seems to change AZGFD and USFWS responsibility and liability related to wolves that won't or don't stay in the original range. I already know their "failed" pack has long since outpaced their reintroduction program, and has expanded to far beyond any lines they can show you on a map. G&F either has no clue where they have actually ranged to or won't release it. Read up people. This is the same thing that happened with the wolves up north and is one of the first steps to expanding the already "failed" program. They've also stated that the area in 1 and 27 designated is unsuitable for long term success and viability of the population. The article detailed other areas in 3A/3C, 9, 10, etc. Didn't any of you read the info from the Arizona Deer Association? JMHO, but wolves have no place in modern society in the lower 48, any more than we have room or a place for free range buffalo herds. There's not room, their habitat is no longer free of human intrusion, and the wolves' success will lead to empty freezers across the land... I only wish the anti hunting community had the apathetic approach that the hunting community has... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted December 27, 2011 the only hope we have is for the azgfd to take an active pro-hunter, pro-joint use stance instead of the anti/treehugger stance they have embarked upon. but i don't see it happening. the department stinks with treehuggers and anti hunters. kill the wolves. did it once and it didn't hurt anything, do it again. only thing that happened was game numbers went up. Lark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThomC Report post Posted December 28, 2011 If you guys had watched the last commission meeting you would have seen the stance that they have taken. IMO opinion the commission appears to be less than favorable with the program and have set some rules for their participation in the effort. The ex G&F Wolf program manager made a rather enlighting speech. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gearsnagger Report post Posted December 28, 2011 All it will take to end this FUBAR program is a law suit - Prove that these are wolfxdog's and the game is over! The map change also proves it's not about the wolves it's about gaining control of vast tracts of land in the name of "conservation".... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
200"mulie Report post Posted December 28, 2011 I don't have a problem with wolves. Keeps coyote numbers down, keeps prey away from easy targeted area's so they won't destroy habitat, and antelope numbers up. From the show i watched i thought it was good info. Based on the re-introduction in yellowstone after x amount of years. Forget what it was called. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted December 28, 2011 I don't have a problem with wolves. Keeps coyote numbers down, keeps prey away from easy targeted area's so they won't destroy habitat, and antelope numbers up. From the show i watched i thought it was good info. Based on the re-introduction in yellowstone after x amount of years. Forget what it was called. Who produced the show...Center for Biological Diversity? The wolves near Yellowstone have been extremely hard on elk and moose populations and the numbers have exceeded the stated goal by a large number. Yet, when the goal was reached the "controllers" fought tooth and nail to keep anyone from reducing their numbers back to objectives. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted December 28, 2011 the yellowstone wolf numbers have gotten so high that they are running out of things to eat to the point that they are killing grizzlies and eating them. true story. they have all but wiped out the wildlife in the park. it's sorta funny when one endangered species is eating another one. Lark. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattMan Report post Posted December 29, 2011 the yellowstone wolf numbers have gotten so high that they are running out of things to eat to the point that they are killing grizzlies and eating them. true story. they have all but wiped out the wildlife in the park. it's sorta funny when one endangered species is eating another one. Lark. Worse yet when an invasive species, entirely destructive to the arid southwest (Tamarisk, Salt Cedar) is PROTECTED to provide possible habitat for a protected species (Southwest Willow Flycatcher) which has only been counted for a decade or maybe a little more, and no hard evidence shows they were here PRIOR to the invasion of said plant specie. Like a man waking up from a month long drunk, I have to ask, "How did we get here?" 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billrquimby Report post Posted December 29, 2011 I don't have a problem with wolves. Keeps coyote numbers down, keeps prey away from easy targeted area's so they won't destroy habitat, and antelope numbers up. From the show i watched i thought it was good info. Based on the re-introduction in yellowstone after x amount of years. Forget what it was called. Be careful, v-e-r-y careful, and question what you are told when you watch so-called documentaries about wildlife, especially on public television. The National Geographic shows I've seen recently have all had barely hidden agendas designed to turn public opinion against hunting whatever species was being featured. Bill Quimby 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
