Finally!!!

[Wolfwoman]

What does "And I doubt if you really want to." mean?

I see that you are well set in the way that you think and there's no way around that, so there's really no point in debating anymore. I *do* get it, just on a larger scale. I am not Christian either, so the bible doesn't hold water with me. I think that there are ways for us to be able to live (in any state) with limited numbers of ALL species of animals that were there BEFORE US. There needs to be a middle ground, but the opposing sides will never see that. YOU many not want the wold extinct, but believe me when I say I've heard from MANY MANY like you and had many debate with people in your situation that DO think they should be entirely wiped out and do everything in their power (SSS) to make it illegally so.

You should be able to run your own state, but when so many there want the wolf gone completely, then that's when the tree huggers jump in and say no.

There is a difference between having dominion over them and wiping them from the face of the earth too. If I'm correct, somewhere in the bible the woman has to be subservient to man also (or something like that). That didn't work out so well either.

Here's another thing, I used to be closer to the views of the tree huggers when it came to wolves, many years ago. I didn't think it was right to kill wolves. Sine then, I've done a TON of reading and I've talked with MANY people here in Alaska that trap wolves and live in areas where wolves, bears, fox, moose, caribou directly affect their lives and I became more aware of the place of the predator in nature. And that we could take out many of these predators without harming the natural balance of nature. It IS possible to live with all the animals in the same place as man, it happens in sever areas up here. And even tho Alaska is bigger than most states, it's broken down into areas that are similar to a lot of states, so there's really no difference.

I can still learn things and still change the way I think.

Gotta get to the store, have a good day!

[skeet]

[QUOTE=Wolfwoman;329515]
"I see that you are well set in the way that you think and there's no way around that, so there's really no point in debating anymore. I *do* get it, just on a larger scale."

I'm set in my ways?? Pot calling the kettle black for sure. Not debating. Just asking why the people that make these decisions must impose their will on others that have to live with it. what larger scale??


"I think that there are ways for us to be able to live (in any state) with limited numbers of ALL species of animals that were there BEFORE US."

As do I. As long as you don't impose your will on me from long distance without having to live with the consequences.

," but believe me when I say I've heard from MANY MANY like you and had many debate with people in your situation that DO think they should be entirely wiped out"

I have had these same types of debates with others who only want to impose their will on others who feel we ruined the balance of nature and THEY need to make the decisions to change that. Did you not understand there were wolves still here? You've seen wolves in the wild, I am sure. Would you forget what they look like? Doubt it.... The part I think you don't understand is there are people who feel the way you say you used to feel. That we are interlopers on the animals land. It just isn't true. Man by his natue is destructive. Can we change that?? I doubt it. Wolves by their nature are destructive also. Most predators are. I truly believe man will eventually destroy himself but that is a debate left to other venues. As far as Christian or whatever you happen to believe really doesn't matter. You accuse one side of wanting to destroy everything but fail to see the other side of the argument. I know many hunters outdoorsmen and women, ranchers, farmers and people from many walks of life and have yet to hear even one say we should wipe wolves from the face of the earth. What I do hear is people saying it is wrong for people who do not live in this area to be able to control the actions of this constituency. It really torqs 'em off. Even though I am not originally from here I can understand why


"You should be able to run your own state, but when so many there want the wolf gone completely, then that's when the tree huggers jump in and say no."

And there is the statement that is where you are completely wrong. The tree huggers are the ones that imposed their will on the people of this area (correcting the inequities of the past?) by reintroducing an animal that was already here. ..imposed the endangered species act on the animals introduced...and then when the GOALS they had set were exceeded again imposed their will on the residents and kept em on the list. Not even a sorry Charlie..just live with it.... The part about the above statement that REALLY stands out is the word BUT followed by a statement that you really don't know to be true. A supposition if you must. I live here and don't hear it. It seems you want to believe that all others want to destroy 'em all...and that belief is what, after all is said and done, creates the real problem. We have to be protected from ourselves. What self serving BS from the Tree huggers!! And saying that kind of drivell is what perpetuates the lies

[Wolfwoman]

[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

"I see that you are well set in the way that you think and there's no way around that, so there's really no point in debating anymore. I *do* get it, just on a larger scale."

I'm set in my ways?? Pot calling the kettle black for sure. Not debating. Just asking why the people that make these decisions must impose their will on others that have to live with it. what larger scale??

Hmm, no I already said that I'd changed my views years back when I did research and talked with people that had to deal with wolves. I used to BE that WolfLover that said DO NOT KILL ANY. Now I understand and actually use wolf fur. I wouldn't say that makes me set in my ways.


[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

"I think that there are ways for us to be able to live (in any state) with limited numbers of ALL species of animals that were there BEFORE US."

As do I. As long as you don't impose your will on me from long distance without having to live with the consequences.

I'm not imposing my will on anyone, I'm just talking with someone of differing views. I'm sure you have enough people of varying opinions in your own state (pro and con) that you should be able to handle it yourself.

[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

but believe me when I say I've heard from MANY MANY like you and had many debate with people in your situation that DO think they should be entirely wiped out"

I have had these same types of debates with others who only want to impose their will on others who feel we ruined the balance of nature and THEY need to make the decisions to change that. Did you not understand there were wolves still here? You've seen wolves in the wild, I am sure. Would you forget what they look like? Doubt it.... The part I think you don't understand is there are people who feel the way you say you used to feel. That we are interlopers on the animals land. It just isn't true. Man by his natue is destructive. Can we change that?? I doubt it. Wolves by their nature are destructive also. Most predators are. I truly believe man will eventually destroy himself but that is a debate left to other venues. As far as Christian or whatever you happen to believe really doesn't matter. You accuse one side of wanting to destroy everything but fail to see the other side of the argument. I know many hunters outdoorsmen and women, ranchers, farmers and people from many walks of life and have yet to hear even one say we should wipe wolves from the face of the earth.

I can give you links to several forums where I've seen people say that there shouldn't be any wolves in MANY various areas where they USED to be and have been reintroduced and are now overpopulated. They don't want ANY wolves, bottom line. YOU are different, you don't think they should be wiped out, that they have a place, but that they shouldn't be reintroduced in many places... I understand that, but it's too late, they've already done it... so why go through the cycle again?? It's a no-win situation!


[QUOTE=skeet;329517]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

The tree huggers are the ones that imposed their will on the people of this area (correcting the inequities of the past?) by reintroducing an animal that was already here. ..imposed the endangered species act on the animals introduced...and then when the GOALS they had set were exceeded again imposed their will on the residents and kept em on the list. Not even a sorry Charlie..just live with it.... The part about the above statement that REALLY stands out is the word BUT followed by a statement that you really don't know to be true. A supposition if you must. I live here and don't hear it. It seems you want to believe that all others want to destroy 'em all...and that belief is what, after all is said and done, creates the real problem. We have to be protected from ourselves. What self serving BS from the Tree huggers!! And saying that kind of drivell is what perpetuates the lies

I never said ALL others wanted to destroy them all, I also know a lot of hunters and trappers that love to see wolves in the wild, but I also know a LOT that hate the sight of them anywhere. The same goes for coyotes in many places... and mountain lions in others... there will always be a percentage of people that want them wiped out, there will be a percentage that want none killed and in-between are those that have enough sense to know that a certain healthy population can thrive with the prey... that in-between percentage is WAY too small and the other two sides will always fight... like wolves over a kill.

I guess at this point we can just agree to disagree and see if anyone else has anything to say. I hope I haven't made you mad as I love talking wolf politics, it's the ONLY politics I like

[skeet]

Originally Posted by Wolfwoman

[. I hope I haven't made you mad as I love talking wolf politics, it's the ONLY politics I like

Nope not mad. No sense in that. Frustrated because you don't really understand what I have said. The wolf issue is an emotional issue. The do gooder tree huggers would have you think wolves are noble caring animals...as they feel the people on their side of the issue are.. They care not for the problems they create. The only thing they think is that they are better people than others...why they helped get wolves reintroduced...so aren't they grand?? I must also say there really is no such thing as wolf politics. Just another way to try to humanize another animal. There are however wolf issues...Just like the trapping issue. The non trapping side think they are better people than anyone that would wear or use an animal skin..oh horrors. And to cut trees where spotted owls live..how could we... Just so long as they have their house made from those same trees and they don't know..it's OK