RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
You're talking about cows when I didn't even mention them in my post. So you clearly don't have the numbers either. Keep on being pretentious though!
Wolves in Utah
- Thread starter franklin
- Start date
Forgive me for assuming the only claim I'd imagine you, as always taking the bumpkin route, making. That is my bad, and I apologize.
But if we wanna talk natural food web, why do we care how many baby moose/deer are dying? History proves that they balance each other out every x years. Wolf introduction in Yellowstone is unanimously considered a success in bringing back healthy wildlife, plant life, and waterways.
So if there's no argument for cattle, and a neutral argument for/against on natural wildlife in the area, and weighing that to the benefits of the trophic cascade brought out by wolves, then the answer is even simpler; let them be. We'll be better off having them.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
Why do we care? Because it has an impact on an important financial sector for state governments in these rural northern states. No biggie though, just people's jobs.
And I still disagree on the cattle impact. I can guarantee for a fact that herds in Montana have been hit by them, but they won't call it one unless an official sees it occur...and that's going to be unlikely.
Lastly, you're smart, but you communicate like NAOS. It doesn't make any of this enjoyable.
And I still disagree on the cattle impact. I can guarantee for a fact that herds in Montana have been hit by them, but they won't call it one unless an official sees it occur...and that's going to be unlikely.
Lastly, you're smart, but you communicate like NAOS. It doesn't make any of this enjoyable.
Yes. And with a healthier population those animals people flock for miles to see will bring in more people, increasing tax revenues, and yielding the need for more jobs. People would much rather see 20 big moose and 2 wolves than 22 sickly moose and 0 wolves.
There are countless grad students that would come up and do the studies for free, or close to it. I doubt those Montana ranchers bother contacting any of the Universities with this opportunity, as if they're wrong there's now numbers to prove it.
Put up, or shut up.
Mud slinging will get you no where. He who shall not be named never posts links, or has numbers. So which of us, exactly, posts like that?
The dumb **** thread killer has arrived. I liked all the links to studies following your dumb assed, sensationalized youtube video.
Well.. I could play the "But he edited his post" card like you have in the past, But instead, I admitted it and apologized. Albeit backhandedly, but it was still acknowledgement and apology.
I can see you're still upset over my troll job. Good to see you too, superstar.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
You're literally not even tracking what I'm saying, and I just had a baby so I'm not going to do this. You just don't get it.
I'm going to end with this though. The idea that a layman can look at research studies and decide they know more about a subject than somebody with actual real life experience in that subject is asinine. It happens all the time on the Internet, and even I've done it sometimes. It's ridiculous. And don't you dare say I'm doing the mud slinging. You've been insulting me this entire time.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
You mean I don't like it when a non-native species is introduced, threatening the efficiency of several industries?! Shocker!
I'm gonna go drop off a bunch of grizzly bears in New York City, then tell people they can't explain bc "nature".
But that's the thing... I'm some idiot; sure. The people doing the research aren't. They're boots on the ground in the middle of it. It's one thing for the jacka$$ like me to analyze all of this. It's another thing for the guys with the remote collars on the elk and wolf subjects. They're the ones telling you this data. I'm just the piss poor mouthpiece.
So who you gonna believe? The guy that had a couple of his animals killed that one time, or the guys that tracked the animals for weeks, and continued surveillance with radio collars for 12 months?