Gollee

[Caprock]

All this time I thought they just killed what they needed! Thats what they want you to think anyway! http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/03/25/wol...cmp=hplnws

[Fogman01]

I saw this Fox News story and posted the following on the Shiloh Forum:
I wonder if the elk herd can sustain the loss of between 365 and 730 elk calves a year by only nine wolves. And that's not including "surplus killing." Nine human hunters would have killed at most nine elk per YEAR. All animals need to be managed and controlled like it or not. Just a result of too many people. For example, If the wolves were controlled outside Yellowstone, they would learn to stay inside the park where they might actually help control the elk in Yellowstone.
The wolf was eradicated for a reason. But there seems to be no reason involved in the re-introduction or its consequences. I have always thought a sub-agenda of some groups advocating the re-introduction was to replace the human hunter with the wolf. Then no hunting - no reason to allow sporting rifles. One more nail in the 2nd Amendment's coffin.
If something should be re-introduced it should be the woolly mammoth or a mastodon. Cloning is possible and the DNA exists.