Yellowstone's 'Famous' Alpha Female Shot and Killed

[-Ravenheart-]

Reading the past posts on here, I've got some points to bring up.

Do you feel bad for all the wolves killed by tigers in the Sikhote Alin region of Siberia? Apparently, that kind of thing happens a lot there.

Well, that's a natural death. Having a piece of metal suddenly shoot through your vital organs is NOT a natural death. And please, no one say, "It's natural because we were capable to invent it! It's a normal way for humans to hunt!" …no.

How long have humans been on this earth without guns? Some thousands of years, yes? With their own capabilities of survival before guns and weapons like that?

Really? I dont mean to be rude and I understand it's an opinion but I must disagree. I dont know if my example is going to be "sport" to you, but what about the Indians or whatever. They need the fur for warmth, they need the meat for food. So I dont know if thats "sport" to you, but just an observation.

Indians hunted wolves as a means of survival, but probably also hunted them for sport. I can look past that though, because they didn't come here on a boat one day and bring their "Little Red Riding Hood" fairytale fears with them.

Hunting for "sport" is basically the kinder way of saying, "Non beneficial hunting". Yes, it is a means of population control now, but rewind a few hundred years ago, they didn't need to manage the population, did they? Yet they still hunted them as much as they're hunted now, maybe even more so.

It would make sense if sport-hunters actually used the animal itself for… something useful. But their fur ends up as a decoration, a way of displaying some sort of achievement I assume.

People don't really kill wolves for sport. It is usually to lower the population, keep it in check. Killing wolves for "sport" can actually help wolves, prevent starvation. As river6 said, letting the population get out of hand is worse off than killing a handful of members a season.

Yeah, they're lowering the population. But how much will they lower it? As other users have said on here, people will find a way around hunting laws. So if the population were lowered too much, and the government issued that they should stop hunting the wolves, they'll still be hunted to endangerment. Then they'll be reintroduced again, it's a never ending cycle.

As for preventing starvation, if humans weren't hunting the same prey as the wolves, would starvation pose as much of a problem? Even if they over-hunted their prey already, humans aren't making it any easier for them.

[alethe]

Too much population + not enough food + competition with other species for the same food (bears, cougers, etc) = starving and dead wolves.

[Koa]

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/mammals/wolves/mgmt.html

http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/management/wolf/


https://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/wildlife-1000380.aspx

Certainly all sounds like sport to me.
But really, sarcasm aside, I encourage you to read the links provided above among other states' positions and method outlines towards wolf hunting. It's really not what you are making it out to be. And let's keep it real here -- the wolves up north in the United States are really small potatoes in terms of conservation. If you want something wolf-related to get upset about, all you have to do is go a bit further south and maybe the Mexican gray wolf might actually pique your interest. They're really the ones you need to be concerned over. Not these guys... I mean really. If people would actually step away from the wolves in the northern regions of the United States...

And the whole "re-introduction cycle" being started if wolves keep being hunted up north? The wolves that were "re-introduced" to Yellowstone more appropriately fit the term "introduced" instead...

[TheImmortalWolf]

sad to see the alpha female die i cant believe there is hunting in yellowstone it needs to stop

[-Ravenheart-]

I'd like to thank Koa for supplying me with links to read. However, none of them changed my views on this situation, and that's okay. People have their own opinions about things.

Taking that into consideration, I've recently decided that it is rather pointless to make others see where I'm coming from, if most will refuse to listen to other opinions due to their own beliefs, and they'll stick firmly to those beliefs (and if some people are very pro-wolf-hunting, that's… alright).

Since I've no reason to write anything else, this shall be my last post on this topic until further notice. Til then, have fun debating.

Bye for now.

(And one more thing, I'd like to point out the complete irony of the pro-wolf-hunting discussions filed under "Wolf Conservation". I mean, come on. There's nothing weird about that?)

[alethe]

Pro wolf hunting? Are you even reading our posts? I'm pro wolf hunting for a purpose. There is purpose in most wolf hunting now.

Go back to my lovely equation.

Too much population + not enough food + competition with other species for the same food (bears, cougers, etc) = starving and dead wolves.

I know what's coming. Wolves have been kept under control on their own for centuries, why do humans need to hunt them?
Development of society has, sadly, decreased the amount of land wolves live on.
Think of it this way. You have a small, half gallon fish tank. Would you keep 20 fish in there? No, there isn't space, and they'd compete too much for food. Its the same with wolf hunting. If you don't hunt the wolves now, then there isn't enough space for them, other predators, and prey to live.

Again, I'm not pro let's-all-go-out-and-shoot-anything-that-moves. If the animal isn't endangered, then I don't see why its horrible to go hunt it. People hunt elk and bison for sport; why are they above wolves? Now, if the species is endangered, then no. Don't hunt it. But gray wolves AREN'T endangered. They don't need help when it comes to bringing the population up.

[Koa]

The term "conservation" suggests the preservation of something... If you are trying to preserve something, you will do what is best for whatever it is you are preserving. It's not one-sided "don't shoot anything." For example, let's says a subregion of a bigger region within an animal population is quite ill, and you do not want it spreading to thw better part of the population. Or, you want to manage the population in general, and managing can mean management through hunting. That's my understanding of conservstion, so it doesn't seem ironic to me. (-:

[Chumpkins_]

Taking that into consideration, I've recently decided that it is rather pointless to make others see where I'm coming from, if most will refuse to listen to other opinions due to their own beliefs, and they'll stick firmly to those beliefs (and if some people are very pro-wolf-hunting, that's… alright).

People hunt wolves to help them, not hurt them.The population won't (most likely) get too low because wolves reproduce quickly. No one is refusing to listen to your own beliefs, we are "pro wolf hunting" because we don't want to see wolves starving.

[valkea]

Yet another reminder to be polite and respectful to all users. Any more disrespectful posts will be removed, and the topic locked if it starts going too far.
(The post that ended up being the reason for this warning has been removed, if anyone was confused.)

[TheImmortalWolf]

tell ravenheart that to and I thougt was a glitch and it disappeared

[valkea]

tell ravenheart that to

My post was not aimed toward anyone in particular, it goes for everyone posting. Sorry if you thought I was targeting you :c

[Darkwolf700]

Why would they do such a thing to wolves. What is she was about to have pups! >:(

[pickledham]

Why would they do such a thing to wolves. What is she was about to have pups! >:(

Well I'll admit that it probably wasn't the best idea to shoot a collared wolf, but the person responsible may not have been aware of that. The wolf traveled outside of the safety of Yellowstone. No one here knows why the person killed the wolf, but she was a target like any wolf. I don't want to say "no worries" but she had many pups to replace herself and continue her genes, as many other users have stated. So technically she stills lives on in a sense.
In addition, I don't think the users that posted previously don't care about the wolf dying exactly. They just don't understand why the media portrayed her hunting to be a significant event.

[Sambhur]

Reminder: don't be rude, and make sure your posts actually contribute to the discussion. If you don't have anything decent to say, don't say anything at all. I'm going to go ahead and remove the latest disrespectful post (edit: and now it has been removed).

[firedog6]

Uh, yes, I know, to everybody, this female was legally killed. But, can the hunter who killed her, legally kill me? My master's species is overpopulated, humans are over-populated. Wolves would get over-populated if hunters didn't kill them. Humans are overpopulated. Wolves and humans alike have the same nervous system, which means, we look so
different - however, we feel the same pain. A human could feel just as much pain as a wolf, yet, it's okay the hunt & kill wolves... because, they don't have our smarts? How low!

I really don't want to start another fight on here. I'm simply stating my opinion in a rather rash way, I understand, but it is not geared towards anybody except for evil wolf hunters. Let me have my opinion, and I'll let you have yours.