MNGunTalk.com

justaguy wrote:I live in the burbs and will believe what the people with boots on the ground are telling me. Which is they are killing a lot of big game.

Pat try crock potting them. It really brings out the flavor.

Rem700 wrote:Maybe I am confused with aerial hunting, What do they do take the wolves up in a plane and then push them out the door to there death?

Rem700 wrote:How is aerial hunting inhumane as compared to hunting them on the ground?
Maybe I am confused with aerial hunting, What do they do take the wolves up in a plane and then push them out the door to there death?

Rem700 wrote:How is aerial hunting inhumane as compared to hunting them on the ground?
Maybe I am confused with aerial hunting, What do they do take the wolves up in a plane and then push them out the door to there death?

Sipowicz wrote:

Rem700 wrote:Maybe I am confused with aerial hunting, What do they do take the wolves up in a plane and then push them out the door to there death?

Aerial hunting is chasing the animal (specifically wolves here, but could be any animal) in a helicopter all over the place until it is exhausted, landing the chopper, then walking up to the animal at point blank range and shooting it.

Another inhumane method of wolf eradication is putting a container releasing toxic gases in the wolf den, essentially performing a Hitler-esque gas chamber. Any that happen to survive stumble out and are killed by the bear traps placed outside the den (not hidden, because there is no need to when the animal is stumbling in sheer stupor due to the toxic fumes).

Rem700 wrote:

Sipowicz wrote:I said it before and I will say it again, I'm not opposed to population control, but control isn't eradication. Nor is control using the inhumane tactics that are still occuring in Alaska of aerial hunting. I'm really not opposed to hunting anything, regardless of how cute, cuddly, or whatever it may look or be. It's the manner in which it is done where I have the problem; Irealize there has to be a control of the population though. A bounty is the road to extinction which is certainly not right. That said, this problem as is most problems with any wild animals is US invading where they lived first. Yes, being at the top of the food chain (us) gives us the ability to do that, but that doesn't grant a right to eradicate anything and everything in our way.

How is aerial hunting inhumane as compared to hunting them on the ground?
Maybe I am confused with aerial hunting, What do they do take the wolves up in a plane and then push them out the door to there death?

Wolf Hunts to Open, Judge Eyes Injunction Request

By Matthew Brown, Associated Press, 08-31-09
MISSOULA – Gray wolf hunting was set to begin in the Northern Rockies, even as a federal judge eyed a request to stop the killing of the predators just four months after they were removed from the endangered species list.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy said Monday he would rule as quickly as he could on a last-minute injunction sought by environmental and animal welfare groups opposed to the hunts in Idaho and Montana.

Hunters were poised to head into the field Tuesday in Idaho, where a quota allowed as many as 220 wolves to be killed. Montana's season is set to begin Sept. 15, with a quota of 75 wolves.

Missoula hunter Mac McLaughlin attended Monday's court hearing then left to buy his hunting tag, saying he was tired of the wolves attacking elk. He intended to use an elk call to lure wolves.

"If the opportunity comes up, you bet I'll shoot one," he said. "There's got to be a balance and our game populations have taken a terrible beating."

More than 9,000 hunters in Idaho already have bought tags allowing them to kill a wolf. Tags went on sale Monday in Montana.

Wolves were removed from the endangered species list in Idaho and Montana in May, with management of the animals transferred to the state wildlife agencies.

Doug Honnold of the environmental law firm Earthjustice said wolves remained at risk because the states had insufficient safeguards to ensure their safety.

"It's the endangered species that need to be protected, not the states' rights to kill wolves," Honnold said during the hearing.

Michael Eitel, representing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, said the agency would keep monitoring the wolves and step in to return the species to the endangered list if warranted.

"The Northern Rocky Mountain wolves are doing very well," Eitel said. "Yes there might be wolves that are killed, but that will not affect the population in Idaho and Montana."

Wolves once roamed North America but by the 1930s had been largely exterminated outside Alaska and Canada. An estimated 1,650 of the animals now live in the Northern Rockies — the result of a contentious $30 million reintroduction program that began in 1995.

Today, the debate centers on whether that population will remain viable if hunting is allowed. That population is now five times the original recovery goal set in the 1990s.

Wyoming was carved out of the territory where wolves were removed from the endangered list.

That prompted Honnold to claim the government had "flip-flopped" on a prior policy against making endangered species decisions based on political boundaries.

In court, Eitel acknowledged his agency changed its position on the issue but urged Judge Molloy to accept its latest interpretation of the law.

Molloy appeared doubtful. "How am I supposed to make judgment as to which of their positions to give deference to?" he asked.

Molloy gave no indication how he might rule on the injunction request. State wildlife officials said the hunts would proceed pending the ruling.

Last year, Molloy sided with environmentalists in a similar case.

As a result, the federal government kept about 300 wolves in Wyoming on the endangered list.

macphisto wrote:

DeanC wrote:The way to ensure a stable wolf population is to allow limited hunting, charging large fees for the permits and dedicate those revenues to wolf management.

...and free kickass wolf shirts for everyone!