Boundary Waters Quetico Forum :: Listening Point - General Discussion :: Isle Royale to get relocated wolves
|
Author | Message Text | ||
BobDobbs |
Zulu: "I read somewhere that Biologists wish to promote diversity in the pack by including Mexican Wolves who have made their way across the border into Arizona. The Wolves are being encouraged to apply for resident status. Their pups, who only know regurgitated American food should be allowed to stay regardless." I see what you did there ;-) |
||
Pinetree |
woodsandwater: "Interesting comments. As someone who actually worked on the Wolf-Moose project under Dr. Rolf Peterson during the summers of '78, '79, when wolf density was at it's highest with 50 animals in four packs, backpacked ten other trips, having logged about 2,000 miles over the entire island, collected the kills and tracked the packs, introduction is the way to go on this unique National Park and International Biosphere. Had not parvovirus been introduced and harmed the wolf population there might have been a different outcome. The ISLAND - Flora and fauna - not just the moose herd, needs this Apex predator. It will be facinating to see how this all plays out in the years and decades to come. If you've never been to IR, I encourage you to go. But I would defintely avoid the peak season." Agree with you 100%. |
||
DrBobDg |
dr bob |
||
Jackfish |
Have you ever been on Isle Royale? I haven't been on a moose hunt in Alaska so I can't compare, but I've been on IR three different times. Quartering a moose and hauling it out isn't even close to easy with the terrain and location along with the limitations for wheels and anything motorized. |
||
HowardSprague |
|
||
Zulu |
|
||
mastertangler |
I was not aware however of there having been several mass extinctions. An interesting proposition of which I can probably assume there are some basis to make the claims. The veracity of which is probably subject to varying amounts of disagreement within the scientific community (as would be expected) but certainly there can be no denying of mass extinction event/s outside of human involvement. But (not to put to fine a point on it) I am generally always suspect whenever I hear the words "some scientists believe" etc. etc. as per the next mass extinction being imminent. That statement, "some scientists believe", is usually a precursor to opinions which lack much depth or substance IMO and need the help from the much vaunted "scientific community" to gain credibility and traction. That is not a smear by the way of scientists, I always wanted to be one, but they are not always correct as history has clearly shown and to blithely accept what is put forth from the scientific community without at least some skepticism is not wise. After all, scientists are merely people, and people are often impacted by political and financial factors which directly effect their lives. For example, I would not want to be a scientist in this day and age and publicly express any doubts on Climate Change as it is very likely your career (and thus your families future) might be directly impacted. Sad but true. But I digress, what were we talking about? Oh yes, importing wolves to Isle Royale to do something about the ever expanding moose population. If you have never seen a moose just go to the island. |
||
BWPaddler |
woodsandwater: "Interesting comments. As someone who actually worked on the Wolf-Moose project under Dr. Rolf Peterson during the summers of '78, '79, when wolf density was at it's highest with 50 animals in four packs, backpacked ten other trips, having logged about 2,000 miles over the entire island, collected the kills and tracked the packs, introduction is the way to go on this unique National Park and International Biosphere. Had not parvovirus been introduced and harmed the wolf population there might have been a different outcome. The ISLAND - Flora and fauna - not just the moose herd, needs this Apex predator. It will be facinating to see how this all plays out in the years and decades to come. If you've never been to IR, I encourage you to go. But I would defintely avoid the peak season." Interesting viewpoint, thanks for speaking up. I had forgotten about the virus and domestic dog link. |
||
HansSolo |
woodsandwater: "Interesting comments. As someone who actually worked on the Wolf-Moose project under Dr. Rolf Peterson during the summers of '78, '79, when wolf density was at it's highest with 50 animals in four packs, backpacked ten other trips, having logged about 2,000 miles over the entire island, collected the kills and tracked the packs, introduction is the way to go on this unique National Park and International Biosphere. Had not parvovirus been introduced and harmed the wolf population there might have been a different outcome. The ISLAND - Flora and fauna - not just the moose herd, needs this Apex predator. It will be facinating to see how this all plays out in the years and decades to come. If you've never been to IR, I encourage you to go. But I would defintely avoid the peak season." Thank you for your knowledgeable input woodsandwater and I couldn't agree with you more! Although some may see it as interfering with nature, the inadvertent introduction of the parvovirus essentially interred with nature. It's my understanding that the parvovirus was most likely introduced by a dog that accompanied a family that had their boat docked at one of the many docks that exist at many Lake Superior shoreline campsites. Although it may seem "unnatural" to re-introduce wolves to Isle Royale, I see it as correcting a wrong. Between 1978 to 2011, I have traveled Isle Royale eight times; four backpacking trips, three solo canoe-tripping tours of the interior lakes and the Lake Superior shoreline, and one-kayaking touring trip along the island's shoreline. Throughout my various trips to Isle Royale I've covered most all of the island and have enjoyed the varied beauty and the unique personality the island has to offer. Isle Royale is a special place and it wouldn't have the same appeal and atmosphere without the moose-wolf relationship. Hans Solo |
||
Grizzlyman |
MrBadExample: " I think you're on the right track. Dinosaurs were native to isle royale waaaayyy before wolves. Komodo dragons may be the next closest thing to restoring a "natural" habitat. That is of course until we have the technology to "Jurassic park" ourselves some velociraptors.... |
||
DrBobDg |
dr bob |
||
Savage Voyageur |
|
||
arctic |
A 1998 genetic study showed that the moose on Isle Royale don't match any of the three types known in Ontario, but do match those from NW Minnesota. It was previously assumed that a few moose had crossed the lake ice in the cold winter of 1912-13, but the herd was already up to 250-300 animals by 1915--an impossible amount of growth. Moose are extremely wary of going out onto the sheer lake ice that would occur on a frozen Lake Superior. Smaller, snow-covered lakes, yes. (See "North Shore: A Natural History of Minnesota's Superior Coast" by Chel Anderson and Adelheid Fischer, 2015). |
||
ellahallely |
In the last 30 years the ice bridge has formed several times and many wolves have crossed it. Only to be chased by airplane and followed by "researchers". In every case they turned around and left. In fact over the years wolf have left the island over the ice bridge. 2 million to move 20 wolves? Is this a joke? Misprint? Or theft? I know this would never fly, but I say let the Native Indians of Minnesota and Michigan hunt them. That way the numbers could be controlled. We have three Bands already hunting moose in Minnesota. Maybe they could take it to the island . I know nobody has a closer history and relationship with the island then the Grand Portage Tribe. I have come to grips with the fact I can understand and relate to the wolves and moose more then I can with some people these days. And I am okay with that. We won't thin the wolf packs to save the moose, so we can have both. But will watch people run their sled dogs to death for our enjoyment. |
||
Grizzlyman |
I don't know how many articles they've written over the past few years about how wolf populations don't impact moose. Then of course this whole article is about using wolves to control moose population.... |
||
MrBadExample |
My basic stance is that we as humans already meddle in nature enough just existing. Why do we also try to control it with actions such as this? Where does the idea come from making us think that we have the best idea for what should happen in nature? If have posted these questions before. They are honest questions. |
||
muddyfeet |
arctic: " That is a fantastic book! |
||
arctic |
muddyfeet: "arctic: " Absolutely--a masterpiece. |
||
DrBobDg |
ellahallely: "When man sticks their finger in stuff like this things never go well. I look at what has happened to fishing on Mille Lacs lakes. Millions spent and no one is happy with the results. Or radio collard moose research calves being abandoned by their mothers and killed by wolves. Amen Brother !!! Preach it. Can you imagine the $$ it will take to relocate wolves so they can hunt and kill moose....??? I am sure if you asked a moose they would rather die by a bullet rather than starving or being stalked and hunted down by a pack of wolves..... dr bob |
||
MikeinMpls |
Except we're not. Mike |
||
DrBobDg |
DeanL: "Grizzlyman: "I swear the DNR agencies just do these things to see if anyone's keeping score.... I wonder how they were taught that.?? Maybe Wisconsin wolves can be taught not to eat farmers calves and folks pet dogs. That would leave them with the deer herds that need to be thinned out due to CWD> dr bob |
||
riverrunner |
MrBadExample: "I would say that I agree with you somewhat. When hasn't man been involved with nature as long as man as been around they have changed the areas they live in for their betterment. From the earliest peoples setting fires, dropping rocks into streams any other thing they have done. The idea that you can get man out of nature is foolishness because we are part of nature. As far as the wolves and moose on the island, it makes more sense to have a hunt and charge people and use that money for the park them to spend it on a program that cost the park millions of dollars. Then in another 50 years have to do it all over again as the wolves inter breed and die off. If wolves cross over by themselves so be it that is nature placing them there is not. Humans hunting and killing things is nature we have been doing that as long as the wolves have. |
||
mastertangler |
Right now there are some 1,200 moose on the island. That seems a bit much. A controlled hunt or relocate some predators. Both options have merit IMO. If I were in charge we would do both. The controlled hunt would help in offsetting the costs of introducing the wolves. Take the money from the hunt every year and bring in some wolves with the $$. Little by little some semblance of balance can be restored. Mother nature is often cruel and ruthless when dealing with such issues as overpopulation. |
||
mjmkjun |
MikeinMpls: "Yes....... more human hubris. We're smarter than nature. Thumbs up! Am in same mindset. "God-given intelligence" is a relative concept. |
||
DeanL |
Grizzlyman: "I swear the DNR agencies just do these things to see if anyone's keeping score.... I love this view point. Maybe it's a different strain of wolf than NE MN has that is conditioned to prey on moose because all we've been told is MN wolves don't eat moose. |
||
Captn Tony |
Here we have an turkeys, otters, osprey, trumpeter swans etc. All because of DNR transplanting. If we wouldn't have messed things years earlier we wouldn't need transplanting but we did. Now admittedly mistakes have been made. Maybe this is one, but people sure seem to be quick to condemn. |
||
OCDave |
I had hoped that we'd get a winter cold enough to create an ice bridge so a few hungry wolves could find their way out to the island but, it appears the park service won't be waiting for that to happen. Should this open the door to replaced the many other species that disappeared from the island? |
||
Pinetree |
Its ironic the wolf population decreased from dog pirovirus(sp) from someones domestic dog brought to the Island. Three wolves died from falling in a mine shaft. Yes human beings are part of the picture and always will be. It is the question how we want to project it in many instances? |
||
Grizzlyman |
Whatever- Michigan is paying for it- correct? |
||
MrBadExample |
MikeinMpls: "Yes....... more human hubris. We're smarter than nature. This, in my opinion, is what it all boils down to. The moose were brought there by humans. It’s been unnatural since day 1. An experiment. To gain what? |
||
OSLO |
DeanL: "Grizzlyman: "I swear the DNR agencies just do these things to see if anyone's keeping score.... I'm confused about where people are reading that wolves don't impact moose. This Star Tribune article from a couple of years ago (http://www.startribune.com/in-saving-minnesota-s-moose-scientific-breakthroughs-and-difficult-choices/365163651/) cites DNR data, and lists wolf kills as the number one cause of death among moose. Moose and wolves are native species which have coexisted for a very long time. Wolves will kill moose, but are therefore unlikely to extirpate the species from a large area unless other factors are involved. Those other factors are where we are involved--helping whitetail deer (many of which carry brainworms) dominate the area, and contributing to a rapidly warming climate which stresses the moose and increases parasite populations. Unhealthy moose then make an easy target for wolves. |
||
OSLO |
ellahallely: "When man sticks their finger in stuff like this things never go well. I look at what has happened to fishing on Mille Lacs lakes. Millions spent and no one is happy with the results. Or radio collard moose research calves being abandoned by their mothers and killed by wolves." Many examples of humans successfully restoring ecosystems exist. A classic case is the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone, which by most accounts I have read has been considered a resounding success. Mille Lacs is a challenge because the DNR is making recommendations, and then stakeholders (e.g., resorts) are pushing back, resulting in compromises that are probably not the best course of action according to researchers. When that happens, the fishery is unlikely to rebound as quickly as possible. Regarding moose mortality and collars, researchers knew that some animals would die as a result of their work, which is definitely tragic. However, if the information gained results in many more moose surviving long-term, then you can certainly make an argument that the studies were worth the losses. In both of the cases you cited, the DNR stepped in because humans had already negatively impacted the communities through habitat destruction, introduction of non-native species, climate change, and over-harvesting. |
||
HighnDry |
arctic: "muddyfeet: "arctic: " I'll look for it. I'm always liking for natural history books on the region. Thanks! |
||
ellahallely |
Genetic Viability Link |
||
OSLO |
ellahallely: "Oslo I wish the Yellowstone wolves were doing good. However from what I understand they have been inbreeding for many years. Some say they are facing the same fate as the Isle Royal wolves. Yes all for naught!! The wolf population has actually been relatively steady in Yellowstone for quite awhile. The graph in the article you linked to was either outdated or purposefully cut-off at the last dip in 2012. Here is a more recent population graph (link). I have not seen any recent, published studies that have predicted the demise of the wolves in Yellowstone due to inbreeding. In the articles that I have read, decreases in genetic variation and population that have been observed have been attributed to hunting and trapping outside of the park. Again, population within the park has been relatively steady for a decade though! |
||
Pinetree |
I use to winter camp in the back country of Yellowstone in the 80's and elk numbers were unreal and way to high. There was like 19,000 elk in the northern Yellowstone herd alone. About 1987 before were were back they observed the first Mountain lion in the park in a very long time. They are back now. Getting off track which I am good at. I remember when wolves were first introduced in Yellowstone a coyote came up to a wolf wagging his tail in friendship. The friendship was short lived and also was the coyote. Coyote numbers plummeted and almost disappeared but now came back some(a little) when they learned to run like heck now. ellahallely that was a interesting article. |
||
MrBadExample |
Were they native to Isle Royale prior to mans introduction of moose? I honestly don’t know. If there were no moose on Isle Royale I would assume there would be no wolves. |
||
Pinetree |
|
||
MrBadExample |
I don’t think there would have been enough of the prey they need to survive if not for the moose. |
||
ellahallely |
Not for me. But you know some would think this a great idea. |
||
|
|||
MrBadExample |
Then again, grandpas favorite meal IS boiled bullheads. I always thought it tasted fine. Why don’t they introduce a more interesting predator than wolves? I mean, if they just need something to eat the moose, why not put Siberian Tigers or Komodo dragons on there? What’s the difference? |
||
BWPaddler |
MrBadExample: "My grandpa always said that a man could starve to death eating moose meat. It is DELICIOUS! Better even than venison imho! |
||
mastertangler |
All I can say to either is Ewwwww!! I have never even heard of such a thing. What do you do? Cut some heads off and toss them in a big cauldron of boiling water with a few sprigs of parsley? Sounds positively barbaric. "yes sir, the special today is boiled bull heads delicately seasoned and boiled for a full six hours........skulls are pre cracked........only $59 complete with soup or caesar salad". |
||
riverrunner |
I should go out and catch batch again. The state record yellow bullhead came from a very near by lake. |
||
Jackfish |
Of the people who are suggesting a moose hunt on Isle Royale, how many of you have actually BEEN to the island? (I know some of you have.) Are you serious about wanting to drag a moose through the steep, rocky, thickly-wooded terrain that makes up IR? In some cases, you (and about six of your closest friends) would be dragging that 500+ pound animal for up to a few miles to the closest shoreline where you would THEN have to get a boat up to the shoreline without ruining the prop, load the carcass, then get it to Rock Harbor or Windigo where you could actually boat it off the island. Yes, you could take it out in quarters, but that isn't any easier. My personal opinion is that hunting for moose on IR is ridiculous and almost impossible to accomplish with any sort of success. If bringing in a number of wolves from the outside and setting them free on the island can keep the moose population in check like they've done for decades, then I see nothing but success for the project. The $2 million price tag for the project is pretty steep, considering that's between $66,000 and $100,000 per wolf. On one hand, I find that incredibly hard to believe, but then on the other hand, this is the same government that paid $500 for a hammer. |
||
Pinetree |
The 20-year cost of reintroducing wolves and monitoring them should be about $2 million, according to an estimate included in the plan. Wolf |
||
ellahallely |
I find reading the comments from the readers in the strib entertaining. |
||
MrBadExample |
Why not remove the moose from the island and transplant them back to the mainland? They’d have to round up a posse of the most diabolical cowboys this side of the pecos. Folks with enough grit to drive a herd of moose accross rugged terrain. Coax them to swim accross the lake to freedom. Letting out hardy “Yee Haw’s” and “Giddy Up Now Moose”. Who’s with me? I have herded a moose before. Walked behind her for 2 miles of the Grand Portage. It can be done. ;) |
||
Northland |
Captn Tony: "Sorry I disagree. Man has to interfere in nature because of the mess he makes of nature in the first place. I agree with this. By inserting our presence into the ecosystem in such a forceful way - with major development, population growth, and the resulting habitat loss, etc., we've upset the balance. To re-establish that balance, actions that are outside the natural course of events are needed. Whether we even SHOULD re-establish that balance, or whether the actions chosen are right or wrong, I don't know. But the only alternative with Isle Royale is to let things be. If moose were truly imported there to begin with, maybe that's a better option. But keeping in mind that a key word in NPS is "park," which are for primarily for looking at, I never thought they'd leave things alone, anyway. Then again, at this point, there are so many species existing in our world which were once "invasive" that it's all getting muddled together, anyway. |
||
mastertangler |
This notion that man kind is somehow not part of this world (were we imported from another planet?) and somehow considered as the "problem" I don't buy into. Yup people make mistakes and are not good stewards at times I get it. But we are also exceptional caretakers at times as well. This finger pointing at humanity is not helpful IMO. Lets say mankind was not here......at all. Gone, vanished. Think there still wouldn't be "Climate Change"? Or Hurricanes or wildfires or other cataclysmic events which impact the life on the planet? Of course we all know the answer. Species have come and gone and all without mankinds involvement. I have been on the island for some 40+ days. I believe there could be a moose hunt there as is anywhere else. People are intrepid and often have significant means available. Let folks worry about how to get their moose out of the woods. It can be done. Would it thin the herd sufficiently enough? Doubtful but the dollars collected could certainly help offset the cost of importing wolves.......which may decide to leave anyways as per the last bunch as soon as the ice is thick enough. My moose hunt would be to sit in one of the shelters provided by park service, reading and drinking coffee until one walked up. "hey guys, a little help". |
||
MrBadExample |
Moose herding |
||
Pinetree |
HowardSprague: "From what I've read, so far they've only had two Yellowstone wolves put in for transfers, and one lone wolf from the Isabella area." They're trying to get the same contract the new Vikings quarterback is getting. Three years and 84 million dollars. They're holding out. |
||
Pinetree |
Northland: "Captn Tony: "Sorry I disagree. Man has to interfere in nature because of the mess he makes of nature in the first place. It's a tough call either way. I just wonder what would happen to the vegetation if no wolves are introduced and long term effects on the carrying capacity for moose than. Even in the BWCA you can still see the effects of the deer population was very high and only a few wolves present. One thing though... nature never really seems in balance. It has its cycles. |
||
HowardSprague |
Pinetree: "HowardSprague: "From what I've read, so far they've only had two Yellowstone wolves put in for transfers, and one lone wolf from the Isabella area." All the parks were trying to get the Northern Rockies' Wolf #2137 - strong alpha male, experienced hunter, has all the great wolf fundamentals - but he decided to stay in Oregon. Other free agents still out there are the Michigan Upper Peninsula's Wolf #314, Wyoming's Female Wolf #600, and Mike Glennon. |
||
mastertangler |
Pinetree: "HowardSprague: "From what I've read, so far they've only had two Yellowstone wolves put in for transfers, and one lone wolf from the Isabella area." Ha! Good one! |
||
OSLO |
mastertangler: ""Balance of Nature" Bah humbug.........no such thing. When beavers overpopulate, they get sick and the entire watershed is killed off.........lemmings run off of cliffs etc. etc. etc. Nature is ruthless and indiscriminate and doesn't give a one whit about "balance". I don't know if I completely follow everything in your post. Humans certainly can hurt or help other species. Unfortunately, the scale and reach of many of the changes we are responsible for are unprecedented. Not only is the magnitude of our changes unparalleled, but we are also uniquely capable of informing ourselves about our actions, and changing our behaviors if we wish to. So although we should receive credit for working hard to save species and restore habitat, we also absolutely deserve all the blame we get for habitat destruction and being responsible for more extinctions than any other species on Earth. If humans were not on Earth, extinction would of course still happen. We have concrete evidence that is the case in the form of the fossil record, which documents extinctions happening long, long before humans walked this planet. In fact, we have evidence of at least five mass extinctions that have occurred, and humans were not around for any of them. However, many scientists believe that we are now entering into a sixth mass extinction, and we are not only alive for this one, but we are believed to be responsible for it. We can sit back and shrug our shoulders and say that mass extinctions have happened before, and the Earth will not end. However, just because the Earth will not end, does not mean that our descendants will like what they are left with. You're correct that nature is ruthless and indiscriminate--it does not care if our ecosystems are teaming with diverse communities that provide us with food, oxygen, medicine, and enjoyment, or contain sparsely populated, depauperate regions with little benefit to us. Nature doesn't care, but we should. |
||
Mad_Angler |
Jackfish: "... Jackfish, I enjoy BWCA.com and respect the work you've done here. But... you clearly do not know much about moose hunting. Moose hunting in Alaska is not much different than IR. Folks do it all the time. I have personally carried several moose out of the Alaskan bush. They are cut into quarters and carried out. They are usually carried to a canoe or raft on the nearest river. The last one was about 1 mile from the river. It is not easy. But it is definitely doable and folks do it all the time. It is very similar to elk hunting out west. Thousands of elk are killed, quartered, and hauled out of the mountains. It is fairly common to haul elk quarters 2-5 miles over rough mountainous terrain. By contrast, it would be fairly easy to haul moose quarters to the closest water that could float a canoe. If you don't want hunting on IR, just say so. Don't use false statements to try to make your point. |
||
pamonster |
Mad_Angler: "Jackfish: "... That seams harsh. I'm not sure he was making "false statements"....just giving an opinion, like you. Obviously if you love hunting it's no big deal. Much like carrying a canoe across a portage is fine to me but sounds awful to some of my friends. Regarding the wolves. I think if you truly have a strong position you should get active in the process. Everyone can give their 2 cents but most will never take action and that's a shame.....or maybe we don't really care |
||
Mad_Angler |
pamonster: "Mad_Angler: "... You're right. I had second thoughts as soon as I posted it... I agree. I doubt that Jackfish was intentionally trying to mislead folks. I should have phrased my comments differently... |
||
Mad_Angler |
Jackfish: "MadAngler... no harm. No foul. Glad to hear that there are no hard feelings I have never been to IR. (But I did go to Michigan Tech. So I have known about IR for a long time and I have always wanted to go there.) My area in Alaska was a wilderness area with no motors allowed. So we would just quarter the moose, load the quarters in backpacks and hike out. My terrain was not too bad. But typical terrain can be swampy, hilly, or filled with hummocks that make hiking very difficult. When carrying out elk, the process is the same. They are usually quartered and carried in packs. For elk, the terrain can be very rough. There are always hills/mountains. And there are often blowdowns and very dense woods. Getting big animals out of the woods is definitely not fun. But it is very doable in nearly all circumstances. (And folks also practice some self constraint. For example, we passed on one large moose that was too far from the river to carry. Elk hunters do the same thing.) |
||
ellahallely |
I wonder how tasty the moose are from the island. Minnesota moose is much better tasting they the Alaskan moose that I have tried. |
||
Mad_Angler |
I agree. It is unlikely tat enough hunters would be interested to take enough moose. I also agree that adding hunters is not without cost and hassle for the NPS. But I do wish hunting was added as part of the solution. I know a few folks work hard to hunt moose in the bwca. I know that some would be interested in hunting IR. |
||
Mad_Angler |
ellahallely: "Alaskan moose are huge compared to the moose in Minnesota. I think the moose on the island are half the size of the Alaskan moose. So packing them out might be a little easier. Still a lot of work. Yup. IR moose are probably between Alaskan moose and elk. Should be able to get them out. As for taste, I loved Alaskan moose. It was one of my favorite game animals. But my wife did think it was pretty strong... |
||
gkimball |
"The environmental impact statement released Friday estimated the wolf restoration price at nearly $2 million over 20 years." Get a grip folks. Wolves and moose are one of the signature values of Isle Royale. This thread is a classic example of people who have never worked in natural resource or park management bloviating their opinions as if they are facts. I have been to the park twice as a backpacker. The Minong Ridge trail is as rugged and remote of a trail you will find anywhere in the upper midwest. Everywhere I went I found rugged, rocky, heavily forested land interspersed with wetlands that is only accessible by foot. I know of no rivers to haul a carcass out to for transporting by canoe. I hunted deer in the BWCA for 8 years and dragged out many animals. I also carried out the hind quarter of an adult bull elk about 2 miles in Wyoming through the thickest cover that an animal could find to die in. These experiences tell me there will not be enough people willing or able to do this on Isle Royale to reliably control moose populations as some of the posts to this thread imply. I am also a retired park professional who has interacted with with hunters in many park settings, and have seen how they impact the places they hunt. The result of this eclectic combination helps me see why the NPS isn't rushing into the endless hassles and no-win situations they would find themselves in if they went with the "hunting as moose population control approach." It would be one of the biggest can of worms they ever opened. First of all, they would be dependent on a reliable population of moose hunters who want to hunt in the Isle Royale setting, able and willing to haul the carcasses out, willing to spend the time and money to get it back to the mainland. This would not be moose hunting as most Minnesota or Wisconsin moose hunters know it. All while camping in a way consistent with how people camp on Isle Royale? Looking at it from a management perspective I can see how the Park Service can think it simply wouldn't happen. Also, setting up and administering such a hunt would be costly and time consuming. I can see how they could easily spend $2 million over 20 years to run these hunts. Then what do you do if you realize you aren't controlling the moose population through hunting? I can only imagine what the self-procalimed "experts" would say then. That's why I can see why they chose "Why not try to rebuild the wolf population over the next 20 years?" Like I said - get a grip... |
||
Great Melinko |
|
||
woodsandwater |
|