Federal Court-wolf hunting ends now

[wrestle84]

The wolves are free to go where they like. Bears, bobcats and coyotes all have been on camera where I hunt. Bears, bobcats and coyotes have been shown to kill more deer than wolves as you know. Reading deeper into the resources you provided, studies on 200 wolves averaged 1.9 deer per square mile of range per year. Far less than car kills.
And speaking of cars, you have one right ramjet? If you feel you don't want to hunt where wolves are, you can simply jump in your car and hunt elsewhere. Problem solved.
It's too bad the GOP bumbled this one so badly, not surprising though, using science and evidence to help guide decisions isn't their strong-suit.

Don't let the truth get in the way of your agenda. The GOP was not responsible for removing the wolves from the Endangered species list, the Obama administration was.

[imnofish]

If it wasn't for Little Red Riding Hood and The Three Little Pigs, we wouldn't be having this discussion.   

[bigG]

Sounds like two agenda are involved here. Too bad.

[Handles II]

The wolves are free to go where they like. Bears, bobcats and coyotes all have been on camera where I hunt. Bears, bobcats and coyotes have been shown to kill more deer than wolves as you know. Reading deeper into the resources you provided, studies on 200 wolves averaged 1.9 deer per square mile of range per year. Far less than car kills.
And speaking of cars, you have one right ramjet? If you feel you don't want to hunt where wolves are, you can simply jump in your car and hunt elsewhere. Problem solved.
It's too bad the GOP bumbled this one so badly, not surprising though, using science and evidence to help guide decisions isn't their strong-suit.

Stop deflecting and answer the question yes or no?

I already answered.
Tell ya what...As soon as you produce all of the scientific and biologic evidence that you have said was used by the legislation to start the hunt, I'll give you a yes or a no. That should give me all of eternity or another 15 pages of you flapping your jaws to mull it over, whichever comes first. Your move. 

[ramjet]

gave you the evidence we had legal hunt for a few years what more do you need?

see I knew "as long as it's not in my neighborhood."

[imnofish]

I suspect you two will have to settle this on the golf course.   

[ramjet]

lol if that's the case I am toast I really stink at golf.......⛳️

[bigG]

gave you the evidence we had legal hunt for a few years what more do you need?

see I knew "as long as it's not in my neighborhood."

They are in my neighborhood. Haven't been too bad, here. Lot more livestock where I am than the northern reaches.

On the other hand, I can see why bearhunters despise them. Include in management plan, you'll have your way and day.

[ramjet]

science Handles ; "1.9 deer per sq mile" LOL so there are a bunch .1 deer running around ? That's just stupid stat and who said that the Humane Society biologists............so 1.9 looks better than 2? more ridiculous rhetoric from the emotional HandlesII

[Handles II]

gave you the evidence we had legal hunt for a few years what more do you need?

Really? You believe you gave the biological evidence? Big G and I went through everything you posted pretty thoroughly, no where was there shown any type of scientific need for a hunt such as carrying capacity issues as you said. No where was there any thing that showed wolves were killing too many deer as you suggest.. No where was there any testimonial or quotes from biologists saying this hunt was needed. And no where did you explain, or show, why wildlife biologists from the DNR and University were kept off of the wolf panel, yet people from the trappers association were placed on it.

Please show any or all of these things, as requested previously, and you will get your yes or no answer. See, I'm not about to make such a decision based on emotion as you hope, and as you and a few others have. I want to see the facts first, and make a logical decision after reviewing them. You produce your 'facts'.  

[ramjet]

so Handles how many deer per sq mile do you have in your hunting land?

let's say 50 release 10 wolves and 1 wolf will kill 20 deer per year that's 200 deer in the range that you have yea seems like very few of course they would eventually turn to other things like live stock. I think the DNR should expand the range and release 20 wolves on you're hunting land. You would be a hero with The Humane Society not so much with you're neighbors though.

maybe you could convince them with you're Humane Society funded research and biologists?

yea much of what are quoting is coming from research funded by the anti hunting group th Humane Society oh oh scramble now spend the next four hours researching but the money trail is there.

ahhh too bad the research is skewed because of political and financial influence.........lol

[Handles II]

science Handles ; "1.9 deer per sq mile" LOL so there are a bunch .1 deer running around ? That's just stupid stat and who said that the Humane Society biologists............so 1.9 looks better than 2? more ridiculous rhetoric from the emotional HandlesII

From your source: P 58. "Wolves in the Great Lakes region normally consume 15-18 deer per wolf per year (Fuller 1995). At a rate of 18 deer per wolf pack per year and average Wisconsin wolf pack of 4 wolves on a 70-square mile territory would consume 72 deer per year or about 1 deer per square mile".
Sorry, I was mistaken about the 1.9. Remove the .9. 
In fact, it would be very wise of you to read ALL of page 58 of the source you provided, particularly the 3rd and last paragraphs in the 2nd column. Thanks for producing evidence that completely contradicts what you have been spewing. Maybe you should actually read and comprehend what you are posting before you do. Nah, it's more fun when you do stuff like this. 

[ramjet]

science Handles ; "1.9 deer per sq mile" LOL so there are a bunch .1 deer running around ? That's just stupid stat and who said that the Humane Society biologists............so 1.9 looks better than 2? more ridiculous rhetoric from the emotional HandlesII

From your source: P 58. "Wolves in the Great Lakes region normally consume 15-18 deer per wolf per year (Fuller 1995). At a rate of 18 deer per wolf pack per year and average Wisconsin wolf pack of 4 wolves on a 70-square mile territory would consume 72 deer per year or about 1 deer per square mile".
Sorry, I was mistaken about the 1.9. Remove the .9. 
In fact, it would be very wise of you to read ALL of page 58 of the source you provided, particularly the 3rd and last paragraphs in the 2nd column. Thanks for producing evidence that completely contradicts what you have been spewing. Maybe you should actually read and comprehend what you are posting before you do. Nah, it's more fun when you do stuff like this. 

all folks have to do is Google "Humane Society donates to wolf research" many of tha so called scientific facts come up you have been exposed plain and simple it's no science at a
l just more liberal politics.

[bigG]

You mean to find more politically inspired crap from the other side. I'm sure the NRA and all will produce your Humane Soc. evidence. I have no doubt the humane Society is politically skewed which is why I didn't include any in my links.  honestly, I tried to fins links that supported your side, and every last one of them was some sort of con, gun-nut organization. Tree huggers and overzealous hunters deserve one another.

Kill some yotes and ferals and you might make a dent in the real problem.

You found no evidence to back your claims, Ram. My only claim was that both political extremes had a hand in this, and they both deserve one another. I'll stand by that.

[Handles II]

science Handles ; "1.9 deer per sq mile" LOL so there are a bunch .1 deer running around ? That's just stupid stat and who said that the Humane Society biologists............so 1.9 looks better than 2? more ridiculous rhetoric from the emotional HandlesII

From your source: P 58. "Wolves in the Great Lakes region normally consume 15-18 deer per wolf per year (Fuller 1995). At a rate of 18 deer per wolf pack per year and average Wisconsin wolf pack of 4 wolves on a 70-square mile territory would consume 72 deer per year or about 1 deer per square mile".
Sorry, I was mistaken about the 1.9. Remove the .9. 
In fact, it would be very wise of you to read ALL of page 58 of the source you provided, particularly the 3rd and last paragraphs in the 2nd column. Thanks for producing evidence that completely contradicts what you have been spewing. Maybe you should actually read and comprehend what you are posting before you do. Nah, it's more fun when you do stuff like this. 

all folks have to do is Google "Humane Society donates to wolf research" many of tha so called scientific facts come up you have been exposed plain and simple it's no science at a
l just more liberal politics.

Hey man, this was directly from the source YOU produced as evidence for NEED for a wolf hunt. You are obviously cut of the same cloth as the bumbling legislators and lobbyists who paid for this bill to be written.  Too fun Ramjet, once again you duped yourself! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Speaking of bumbling; Look what your paid spokesman and leader for the NRA said:"WISCONSIN Spirit BloodBrothers the Weisner family trapped this stunning wolf. Though no state has issued an adeqaute number of wolf tags, believe when I tell you that certain WE THE PEOPLE in touch caring Americans are killing MANY MANY more wolves than the numbnut corrupt dishonest PC government thugs allow. Kill as many as you can real conservationists. The wolf population is irresponsibly & dangerously out of control. Wolf jackets ROCK!!"

Old uncle ted is promoting, encouraging and admitting to poaching. What a wonderful example.