are you for or against wolf hunting?

Question

personally i think it's horrible, anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously from Alaska or Idaho

and then those boys cried "wolf"

Answer 1

I'm against!

Answer 2

It took our ancesters almost 200 years to get the wolf and mountian lion population under enough control to be able to raise cattle for YOU to eat, not to mention the safety of our children and pets. When Lewis and Clark came through this part of the country ( yes, Idaho ), they almost starved to death because there were so many wolves that there were no deer or elk to hunt. You may go ahead and think whatever you want, but the fact is; if the wolves and other preditors are left unchecked, they will kill everything that lives. Contrary to popular belief, they do NOT only kill the lame and old and sick, they kill hundreds of deer and elk every year as they are down, giving birth to their young. If the wolf population is left unchecked, there will be nothing left to hunt, beef cattle will be slaughtered in the field, and children will not be safe in their yards. Understand the situation before you criticise others for doing what is necessary for survival !

Answer 3

For, with monitoring and controls.

Anyone that does not consider the wolf a serious threat to human and domestic populations has never been in the field stalked by a wolf pack or has not seen or talked to those that have suffered loss from wolf attacks first hand.

I hunt, fish, camp and hike in an area that has had millions of our tax dollars spent 'reintroducing' wolves into the wild, with somewhat poor results, thank goodness.

It's funny how all the bleeding heart urban dwellers are all for bringing the wolf back and all the ranchers, farmers and folks that actually live in these areas are dead set against. Yet it goes on. I guess it really isn't that funny.

Answer 4

i won't be able to be certain any reason to prohibit wolf looking if the inhabitants will sustain looking. the sole reason that i ought to be certain that wolves should not be hunted is by way of fact a gaggle of idiots are in cost.

Answer 5

I'm FOR it under controlled cicumstances. Anyone who disagrees, has had little or any real experiences with Wolves as as Farmers or Livestock Ranchers have. It's easy to sit in the city and pass judgement on country residents that are directly and in some cases personally affected by Wolves

NOTE** WHO THE HECK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE? WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO PUT OTHERS DOWN FOR THE STATE THEY LIVE IN?? YOU are the one with the obvious PROBLEM!!!

Answer 6

Wolf humping is fun....Oh, you said hunting. I wouldn't shoot em' unless they was tryin' to eat my scrotees.

DJ ---- Maybe we should spend a million releasing wolves into the city eh? That will change their tune.

Answer 7

The Wolf overall is more beneficial than harmful.* They should only be destroyed on an individual basis if they are destroying a persons livestock or endangering a child, woman or man.* They are a beautiful animal.* Otherwise they do not deserve to be slaughtered, they need to be protected from being harmed.*

Answer 8

For

With stealth releases of problem wolves in cattle country in Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana ranchers are again losing calves in the spring to these vermin.

Wolves breed quickly and can litter 6-8 pups when there is abundant food sources. It is important to keep their population in check.

Answer 9

used to live in northern wisconsin hunter and logger have seen what the wolfes are doing there they are allready a problem they need to start a hunting season to controll them

Answer 10

If you lived in the western U.P. of Michigan you commit to the local practice of the three "S's" shoot, shovel, and shut-up! They have destroyed the whitetail population, attacked and killed cattle, killed bears in their dens, and have even stalked and killed bear dogs. All documented and acknowledged by the DNR. So, where's their control measures?

Answer 11

I leave them alone. They are not as bad as they are made out to be. Now during severe weather conditions they can become pesky. That's a different scenario.

H