How sad - VT College loss of life

[roscoe]

I would seriously doubt the wolve population or lack there of has much to do with cougar population in urban areas. Sioux City Iowa has had cougars in the city recently, Samamish Washington has been seeing cougars in the housing areas-- I doubt that is due to lack of wolves.

Too many people taking up too much of the cougar territory is more of the issue.

anyway my 2 cents..

I definitely agree with that for urban areas. Lack of wolves has somewhat of an effect on cougars in urban areas (as less wolves means more food so more cougars, so we'll see them more often in urban places) ... but I agree that as we expand towns into cougars areas, we're going to encounter them more often regardless of wolves

can you tell I'm bored? responses within 4 minutes of the post - yeahh class is awesome right now

[C5 Golfer]

A little bored here too waiting for some prototype parts to be done so that I can check out a few design changes but more important waiting for 3 PM so that I can get on the golf course -- it is one beautiful day here in Seattle.

[Dr D]

Hey, Dr D --I think this is the guy who wrote those words.

Looks like a fine peice for a Montana outing.

oops :lol: :lol:

looks like a newbie to me:smashfrea hang on to it son

[Dr D]

Sorry to bring this up after so long - finals and papers are killing me...

I also just realized my answers are in the quoted stuff - inside the **'s - in case you missed that

The animals are adapting faster than our data for one. Cougars have a 250 square mile range on average according to the data. Yet last fall we paintballed 9 of them in the drainage above my house in one weekend. paintballed so we could accurately tell if it was a different cat or the same one. wolves are quite often alone or in pairs and they travel so far and so fast that the radio tracking collar folks can't keep up with them. what you say is true "if they travel in packs and if you find one there are no others within fifty miles." What we are telling you is that the basic fundemental "facts" that the statistics and counts are based on are no longer or were never true. therefore the data is not true either.

[Dr D]

I definitely agree with that for urban areas. Lack of wolves has somewhat of an effect on cougars in urban areas (as less wolves means more food so more cougars, so we'll see them more often in urban places) ... but I agree that as we expand towns into cougars areas, we're going to encounter them more often regardless of wolves

can you tell I'm bored? responses within 4 minutes of the post - yeahh class is awesome right now

The cougar population glut has nothing to do with wolves they don't eat the same things generally speaking. Cougar prey on mule deer mostly with an appetizer of housecat and poodle. C5 is right they are more accustomed to living around people. They are moving into town as much as town is moving into their territory though. Male cats are ranging further and further to find home range territory that isn't already taken. In some areas there are multiple young cats living in close proximity to people. they have been found east of the mississippi and have been seen throughout the midwest in recent years.

They are overpopulating because of improper game management. they are not even hunted in some areas of the west (california) ANy animal deprived of its natural predator will overpopulate. We are the natural predator of the cougar. Here we have been told by the FWP personel that they will not even waste time investigating cougar killings in residential or farm areas. They aren't allowed to properly manage them and the problems are so widespread that when one is stalking your dog or your kids we just shoot them. ITs not an every day occurrence mind you but it happens.

This is ongoing over the last 15 years in this valley. In 1991 we had repeated attacks on our horses by mtn lions. we called the FWP and they would not respond. the neighbors above us called when they caught it stalking their small children. The game warden responded and looked all over for it only to discover it stalking him. He shot into the ground to scare it and it charged him. He shot it at point blank range killing it at his feet. The next time we called, only weeks later, they told us to do what we had to do they didn't have the manpower to respond to as many predator reports as they were getting. pics to follow

[Dr D]

[/url]

here is a big one (note that the hunter is well behind the animal making it look even bigger but its still a big cat)

the first four were taken out a kitchen window as the cat looked in at the children playing on the floor.

[C5 Golfer]

[quote name=Dr DI tried to tinypic them and post them but they were still to big:confused:

the first four were taken out a kitchen window as the cat looked in at the children playing on the floor.[/quote]

Couple of thoughts if I were living there. I own a Beretta Cougar model in 40SW ( fitting model name huh? ) - I'd probably pack that as I were cutting the grass or tending to my garden, second I would be teaching my kids to shoot accurately a little younger than I did, and finally I'd have their next Christmas present already picked out - just its caliber unknown at this time.

[carvedog]

Sorry to bring this up after so long - finals and papers are killing me...

I also just realized my answers are in the quoted stuff - inside the **'s - in case you missed that

Just and FYI if you click on the icons above in the text area when you are writing you can get quoted response from the box as such.

Copy the text you want to respond to. Click the box in red outline and paste it in new window. Makes following a good debate a little easier. Someone else here showed me too.

[Dr D]

Just and FYI if you click on the icons above in the text area when you are writing you can get quoted response from the box as such.

Copy the text you want to respond to. Click the box in red outline and paste it in new window. Makes following a good debate a little easier. Someone else here showed me too.

cool I wondered how they did that!

I know just enough about computers to be dangerous:lol:

[C5 Golfer]

It is not just the cougar and wolves issue -- other predators that are wrecking once plentiful amounts of steelhead, salmon and precious sturgeon.

The damn Sea Lions--- they are protected so no one can do anything - just like wolves, most people that want them do not understand or care about the side effects.

The sea lions just sit and swim outside the locks and have a gourmet meal all day without having to work for it. The salmon and steelhead are trapped – to them it is like shooting fish in a barrel.

http://www.usa10.com/riverrun/seals.htm

[skategoat]

We are the natural predator of the cougar.

In order for us to be a natural predator, we'd have to kill the things with our bare hands and then *eat* them.

According to CDC:

"In 2001, 7,437 cases of rabies were reported in the United States. Raccoons accounted for almost 40% of reported cases."

According to Arizona Fish and Game:

Confirmed cougar attacks in Canada and U.S. from 1991-2004 - 50 attacks, 10 fatalities.

I tell you, those friggin' raccoons are the problem. We need to declare war on raccoons. And I'm personally going to lobby to be able to carry a sidearm when I put out the garbage.

Vicious bastard

[bobdea]

near a dam?

[Dr D]

In order for us to be a natural predator, we'd have to kill the things with our bare hands and then *eat* them.

According to CDC:

"In 2001, 7,437 cases of rabies were reported in the United States. Raccoons accounted for almost 40% of reported cases."

According to Arizona Fish and Game:

Confirmed cougar attacks in Canada and U.S. from 1991-2004 - 50 attacks, 10 fatalities.

I tell you, those friggin' raccoons are the problem. We need to declare war on raccoons. And I'm personally going to lobby to be able to carry a sidearm when I put out the garbage.

Vicious bastard

we don't have any of the viscious little bastards where we live:lol: C5 does though!

[Dr D]

In order for us to be a natural predator, we'd have to kill the things with our bare hands and then *eat* them.

That may be one of the dumbest statements I have heard. No offense but our natural weapons are the tools and brain power that came up with them. like the man says other than that we are soft on the outside crunchy on the inside and taste good with catsup! We didn't come equipped with gnarly claws and teeth or armour plate but we did come with a brain and opposing thumbs.

Always interesting to see the viewpoint that humans aren't a natural part of the ecosystem. where'd we come from mars after the fact??

cheers

[skategoat]

That may be one of the dumbest statements I have heard. No offense but our natural weapons are the tools and brain power that came up with them. like the man says other than that we are soft on the outside crunchy on the inside and taste good with catsup! We didn't come equipped with gnarly claws and teeth or armour plate but we did come with a brain and opposing thumbs.

Always interesting to see the viewpoint that humans aren't a natural part of the ecosystem. where'd we come from mars after the fact??

cheers

I love it when someone uses the terms "no offense" or "with all due respect" when their intent is exactly the opposite.

So you would consider nuclear weapons to be natural? Chemical weapons too? How about an F-18? After all, they're just tools and the result of our brain power.

By your logic, there should be no controls on our exploitation of the earth's resources since we're just part of the ecosystem. That may be one of the most dangerous notions I've ever heard.

[roscoe]

thank you carvedog, I'll use that next time. I have no idea what most of those little icons mean so i just ignore them

and dr d, I completely disagree about humans being "natural" predators of the other predators. we might be hunters, but not their natural predators. Skategoat is right about having to eat the cougar/wolf. Natural predator populations dont explode because other predators stop killing them/eating them, they explode b/c their competition is no longer there. In the past, they competed with some other predator for a food source (I thought it was wolves, you say wolves dont kill deer so ok we'll assume its some other natural predator we've killed off). Now that the competing natural predator is no longer there, cougar population can increase.

EDIT --- You're right, we are part of the natural environment, we are a species like any other. however, our brain allows us to do a lot of stuff that screws over other species, and eventually ourselves. no other species has this capacity, and all others are therefore (more) dependent upon natural laws of the environment. Instead, using our brains we can overcome natural obstacles like food/shelter and keep increasing our population rapidly, while destroying every other species/habitat, as we virtually have no natural predators/competition - or at least none that truly keep our population in check. since we have the capacity to think and make moral judgements, we should actually use our brain, and not destroy the natural environment. ---EDIT

I've been wondering about this - has the cougar population actually increased DRAMATICALLY, or is it just that humans have been encroaching further and further into their territory so they therefore seem more prevalent, as they get used to humans being around and figure out that we make a good dinner (as C5 pointed out earlier)? I'm jw if you know data on # of cougars in the area (I know you have a problem with traditional counting methods, but that aside, any ideas?)

and ok, I just did some research online - wolves do hunt deer - they prefer elk, but they definitely hunt deer.

Also talks about how they radio-collared a wolf pack and cougars, analyzing what they ate.

They found that wolves DID kill the weak/old.

Also, they radio collared a couple of packs and followed the wolves during predation, and found that the elk population was decreasing by 13% annually, 10% due to HUNTERS.

when reading about their methods, they ARE able to follow the wolves b/c they use helicopters if necessary. Also, radio collars are often more advanced now so that they dont have be within a short range to pinpoint where the wolf is ---meaning i disagree about your earlier statement about scientists inability to track them

ALSO, new rules about killing wolves ...

"But until now, private individuals needed special permission to kill wolves that had developed a taste for domestic animals. Under the new rules, they may shoot wolves that are harassing livestock or other domestic animals. In addition, the federal government will relinquish responsibility to states and Indian tribes that develop approved wolf-management plans. At the moment, Idaho and Montana fit that category.

The general idea, officials say, is to increase opportunities to remove problem wolves while still protecting the majority of wolves that are not causing conflicts with people."

[roscoe]

The damn Sea Lions--- they are protected so no one can do anything - just like wolves, most people that want them do not understand or care about the side effects.

so would you rather have a "natural" environment like what Dr D is talking about, where we masters and everything else can get out of our way, or a natural environment that is as close to natural as we can get it?

I guess it comes down to how you value nature and the "rights" of others species. Is it OK for us to come in and trample them, kill them all, and then just not worry about the effects it has on the overall ecosystem? what about global warming? is that only an issue because it will effect us (if you think it is an issue)?

Personally, I of course dont value wolves as much as humans. if a cougar is attacking your family, shoot it. But I do feel we should try to keep nature natural. I also think we should do something about global warming not only because it effects us, but because of the damage it will eventually do every other living organism. (I hope i didnt just open up an even bigger global warming debate )

[C5 Golfer]

so would you rather have a "natural" environment like what Dr D is talking about, where we masters and everything else can get out of our way, or a natural environment that is as close to natural as we can get it?

Yes - a natural environment. Locks and dams are not natural-- this has become the new home for these hungry and wasteful Sea Lions. It would be very similar to fencing all the deer and elk migration in a funnel and then letting the cougars and wolves just sit at the exit and get fat. How long would our herds last under that condition? No wonder the Steelhead and salmon are on or are going on the endangered species list. I would bet if this killing of salmon and sturgeon were to be seen above the surface like one would see a massacre of deer or elk - it would stop tomorrow. Those that can change this (not able to control or kill damn sea lions) are blind.

The sea lions just started 2 years ago to kill mature breeding sturgeon - these are the fish that are big and old - they take a few bites and move onto the next sturgeon. If it does not stop the Columbia sturgeon will also be on the endangered species list. All thanks to a non- natural predator that we let loose uncontrolled.

[Neuffy]

I love it when someone uses the terms "no offense" or "with all due respect" when their intent is exactly the opposite.

So you would consider nuclear weapons to be natural? Chemical weapons too? How about an F-18? After all, they're just tools and the result of our brain power.

By your logic, there should be no controls on our exploitation of the earth's resources since we're just part of the ecosystem. That may be one of the most dangerous notions I've ever heard.

No no no .... controls we place upon ourselves and others are natural too!

[roscoe]

i dont know anything about the sea lion - but from what it sounds like I agree with you -- there needs to be some kind of control on populations we are trying to protect, so they dont go and endanger another species (including ourselves).

when i was asking what you thought about natural environments, I was thinking more about the wolf part of your original statement - b/c to me, wolves/other species which are either reintroduced to their original habitat or are protected by the ESA in their natural habitat should be protected (but also managed in such a way so that human life can continue, with hopefully only minor changes in doing so). So by saying "the people who want them" I thought (wrongfully) that you didnt want them/agree with reintroducing species to natural environments (granted that sea lions are not in their natural environment...)

a few weeks ago I was listening to a lecture about owls on the west coast, which are protected by the ESA. it was interesting to hear about the different management plans - all of which will have an effect on the logging industry. at what point do we limit our protection of natural species to allow progress? I think policy is probably the hardest part about ecology - because almost everything we do to help the environment ends up hurting the economy.

g'gnight all...

[bobdea]

I love it when someone uses the terms "no offense" or "with all due respect" when their intent is exactly the opposite.

So you would consider nuclear weapons to be natural? Chemical weapons too? How about an F-18? After all, they're just tools and the result of our brain power.

By your logic, there should be no controls on our exploitation of the earth's resources since we're just part of the ecosystem. That may be one of the most dangerous notions I've ever heard.

This is the way allot of americans feel about it, I deal with all the time.

The Bush admistration feels this way too.

Imagine trying to explain climate change to these people............

[bobdea]

it's their fault that WE put a dam in, that in and of it's self took a larger toll of the migratory salmonid populations

you say this like the sea lion are the real problem but it's a great example of the common outlook here, "the sea lions are killing all the fish" but the fact is that it's because the eco system was previously ****ed with because dams were put in and such thus allowing predators to get out of control.

ever think that the proper solution is to take out the dam?

nope! that would be too inconvinant for some people in the area so we're stuck with it, but when you want to put one in because it's profitable, in some cases millions of people are FORCED to relocate.

this is kinda like people who build their houses in a flood plain and wonder why it floods in a hurricane or after it um, you know, rains but then insist that the most recent storm was the worst one in 40 years and that either god or the enviroment is out to get them and it needs to be stopped.

[roscoe]

Imagine trying to explain climate change to these people............

hahaha Good One!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I was in texas over spring break with visiting my uncle, and next door to him is this geologist that works for the government, consulting with oil companies. Needless to say, we got into the climate change argument. He claims everything is due to natural cyles - which is b*ll sh**.

If it were all part of a natural cycle (which do occur, every 10,000 years), we SHOULD be heading back into the next ice age. I think it was about in about 1960 when we reached the peak of the inter-glacial period, and at that point scientists were expecting the earth to start cooling, not warming.

[Dr D]

I love it when someone uses the terms "no offense" or "with all due respect" when their intent is exactly the opposite.

So you would consider nuclear weapons to be natural? Chemical weapons too? How about an F-18? After all, they're just tools and the result of our brain power.

By your logic, there should be no controls on our exploitation of the earth's resources since we're just part of the ecosystem. That may be one of the most dangerous notions I've ever heard.

I didn't say our weapons are part of the ecosystem but we definitely are. IT goes without saying that we have a moral responsibility to maintain balance. Notice I said balance. completely removing ourselves from the ecosystem is not the answer either. I have no idea where you made the leap of logic that says I think we should exploit the planet.

[C5 Golfer]

it's their fault that WE put a dam in, that in and of it's self took a larger toll of the migratory salmonid populations

you say this like the sea lion are the real problem but it's a great example of the common outlook here, "the sea lions are killing all the fish" but the fact is that it's because the eco system was previously ****ed with because dams were put in and such thus allowing predators to get out of control.

ever think that the proper solution is to take out the dam?

nope! .

I agree We put in the Dam.. we do take them out at times too!

http://www.sharedsalmonstrategy.org/watersheds/watershed-elwah.htm

The Elwah is doable -- the removal process started in 1992 and maybe just maybe it will actually start to be physically removed in two more years.

The Mighty Columbia -- well that maybe a different story. President FD Roosevelt would turn over in his grave if heard this. There are 14 dams on this river producing the most electrical power of any river in North America. This river by the way is also the river that has had the world's greatest flood - ever. Google up Missoula Flood sometime - also fascinating story on NOVA about this.

Anyway where ever we humans go we tend to **** up Mother Nature and her delicate balance. When we do that we can not let the effect(s) go un-checked is all I am saying when referring to the Sea Lions or Wolves. :)

Aren't we glad we don't have Stalin around anymore??

"No river should ever reach the sea." - Joseph Stalin