No one is going to like me after this, are they?

[Sunpaw]

I love you so much for making this thread, and I too love all wolves. I just can't stand the fanbase that tries to make them these god-like animals whose lives are more valuable, and are superior to the "evil" humans. Even worse, is when they pull facts out of no where. I'm going to lose my mind if someone comes in here screaming about Sarah Palin and starts saying "SAVE THE WOLFS".

[Crin]

Let's say the wolves were slowly dieing out from, whatever reason, would this stop a bear or any of the grizzly bears from stealing food from wolves or killing them when they feel the need to?

Never expected the animals to care, but wolves are smarter than you are giving them credit for. If wolf numbers are low, why would a wolf be hunting anything large enough to get a bears attention, why would it approach a bear at all? A bear can not wipe out all wolves, because while they do not like each other, they also respect each other.

Forgot about this point.

I agree with Kyu again here, and I'm only going to touch on this point this time around. Natural selection and all of that fun sort of stuff.

So let's say that wolves are, for whatever reason, dying out in a certain area. Hunting, illness, whatever it may be. So there are few wolves as there are now, still being taken out by whatever it is. Less wolves mean more prey animals such as deer. With the deer population surging, you then have the issue of over consumption with them. Plants eaten by deer become less frequent due to the fact that it's all being eaten. After a while the wolves should return, and with a heavy population of deer, their numbers will swell then die down after the deer population is evened out. Plants can grow again, etc etc.

But without the protection of wolves in that certain place, there will be an imbalance.  And of course, I'm not saying it's all hunters. Of course it's not. But sometimes those things do happen with bears and lynx and such when confrontation is unavoidable. Dwindling species, numbers unbalanced, and with all the natural rivalry, it is seen as a very important thing to keep wolves alive where they once lived. The Appalachian mountain range of North America used to be full of wolves, extending North and West, the Rocky Mountains and into Canada. Wolves in North America (not counting directly next to the Canadian border) are basically non-existent here. Even into Canada the wolves are fading, taking to sections farther in the North.

And numbers become overpopulated because of human intervention as well. increasing numbers for the specific goal of hunting them for example. numbers wouldn't have to balance themselves out if humans didn't keep sticking their nose into it.

Kyu, I'mma just take yer quotes. Thank ya.

I love you so much for making this thread, and I too love all wolves. I just can't stand the fanbase that tries to make them these god-like animals whose lives are more valuable, and are superior to the "evil" humans. Even worse, is when they pull facts out of no where. I'm going to lose my mind if someone comes in here screaming about Sarah Palin and starts saying "SAVE THE WOLFS".

Wasn't going to go into this, but you replied while I was posting, so meh. Might as well say something.

Your use of the political joke confuses me, honestly. I don't see why the wolves have to go to a particular political party. Be that as it may, my question is why does it bother you so much that people regard them as "god like animals"? Many cultures past and present idolize the wolf for many different reasons. It's going to wipe off on most cultures as mentioned.

Even worse, is when they pull facts out of no where.

Again, I really don't understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that everything I have mentioned means utterly nothing to this discussion about statistics and all of that? If you mean facts out of no where as facts collected after all of these years of animal studies by humans, then I'm not sure if you think that I was lying when I gave statistics, because I assure you that I was not.

[Sunpaw]

No, I wasn't talking about you. When I mentioned people pulling facts out of no where, I was talking about people who create false statistics and try to use them in an argument.
Example: "Wolves never attack livestock"
Example: "There's only 1,000 gray wolves left in the wild"

And for the Sarah Palin thing, I've seen way too many videos, pictures, discussions, made by people saying "Sarah Palin is evil for shooting wolves, she's the biggest wolf killer, bla bla etc." I actually don't like politics (Let's not go into that, though).

And God-like animals. People of all sorts of different cultures do idolize the wolf, I know this. I'm not talking about a spiritual thing or something. I'm talking about people that take a wild animal and say it shouldn't be killed, and that humans should. People that would choose the life of a wolf over a human's life. In fact, I actually agreed with your posts. :/

[Crin]

Aye, okie. Thanks for clearing that bit up for me.

And aye, I do agree with you about that, then. As for the last part of the cultures thing, I think that's true for many animals, really, that people would choose the life of a wolf over a human's life. Or... not exactly that, but... eh. I dunno how to phrase this without sounding how I don't want to sound x.x I think that why people choose the wolf over other animals is because it is 'visually appealing' as compared to a spider to most people.

Within animals most people see a certain innocence and the more relatable an animal is to our lives - the wolf being related to as a common house dog, as we've said here a bunch of times - is only natural that our minds make that connection and most people have a softer spot in their heart then for relatable animals. Not to say that people who don't like wolves also don't like regular dogs, of course, I'm not trying to suggest that.

But aye. I get what you're saying now, Sunpaw. Again, thanks for clearing that up for me.

[Sunpaw]

No problem ^^ I have trouble trying to.... fffffff how do I put it. Make words sound right.

[lugailover]

Ahhh... I have been expecting someone to post this thread eventually.

I agree with everything here. I understand, there is nothing that is exactly special that makes a wolf a harmless animal. They are wild animals, and they have natural instincts to kill just like any other animal. I honestly don't mind wolf hunting. As long as it keeps the population down and protects livestock, even if the animal had a contagious sickness, it would be better to put it down, because if people tried to cure it, it would need special attention, the wolf could get used to people and therefore more encounters would occur. I am the same for deer hunting and all else, as long as the animal is not endangered or protected I'm ok with it.
Don't get me wrong, I love wolves along with many other animals.

But they in a way Do care for each other in a way, most animals do, for example, elephants, primates, and even wolves. Most of the time they kill to protect themselves or their pack, along with their offspring, territory, and dwindling food sources.

I respect wolf haters also, I don't like every animal, and other people are the same, I can understand if;

- A wolf once attacked a friend or family member
- A wolf repeatedly hunts livestock
- Or if you just don't like them

And to recap the animals don't care. It's unlikely for another species to take pity on another species, let alone prey. An example here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ix0y9j32h70

I also understand about the Keeping the animal population down also.

But I have to say that Humans are in fact destroying the planet faster than any other natural event could. We cause pollution, global warming and even made some vital species go extinct. Take a vulture for example, if it wasn't for them, the savannah would be full of carcasses. These are creatures that we underestimate, bees, fish, plankton, penguins. Without Penguins, Sea Lions would go extinct. And without fish, seals would die, meaning no food for Polar bears. Bears also clean up old carcasses that any other animal can't digest.

And Yes I have seen the why do people hate wolves thread; I can understand everything about it. =I

Sorry if I am being pointless, I go sunburned today and I am very irritated at the moment x-x

-May edit- o-o

[wolfgirl56]

Ahhh... I have been expecting someone to post this thread eventually.

I agree with everything here. I understand, there is nothing that is exactly special that makes a wolf a harmless animal. They are wild animals, and they have natural instincts to kill just like any other animal. I honestly don't mind wolf hunting. As long as it keeps the population down and protects livestock, even if the animal had a contagious sickness, it would be better to put it down, because if people tried to cure it, it would need special attention, the wolf could get used to people and therefore more encounters would occur. I am the same for deer hunting and all else, as long as the animal is not endangered or protected I'm ok with it.
Don't get me wrong, I love wolves along with many other animals.

But they in a way Do care for each other in a way, most animals do, for example, elephants, primates, and even wolves. Most of the time they kill to protect themselves or their pack, along with their offspring, territory, and dwindling food sources.

I respect wolf haters also, I don't like every animal, and other people are the same, I can understand if;

- A wolf once attacked a friend or family member
- A wolf repeatedly hunts livestock
- Or if you just don't like them

And to recap the animals don't care. It's unlikely for another species to take pity on another species, let alone prey. An example here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ix0y9j32h70

I also understand about the Keeping the animal population down also.

But I have to say that Humans are in fact destroying the planet faster than any other natural event could. We cause pollution, global warming and even made some vital species go extinct. Take a vulture for example, if it wasn't for them, the savannah would be full of carcasses. These are creatures that we underestimate, bees, fish, plankton, penguins. Without Penguins, Sea Lions would go extinct. And without fish, seals would die, meaning no food for Polar bears. Bears also clean up old carcasses that any other animal can't digest.

And Yes I have seen the why do people hate wolves thread; I can understand everything about it. =I

Sorry if I am being pointless, I go sunburned today and I am very irritated at the moment x-x

-May edit- o-o

^
This

[Abomine]

I think you explained your point very well, Minnie, and it's also very refreshing to see people having civilized discussions (well, for the most part, anyway...-_-) on this thread.

Though I disagree with you on one thing, about nature not having it's own balance. Animals go extinct when they are no longer able to cope with their changing environment (whether that's climate change or human intervention). When an animal goes extinct, populations of different species fluctuate for a while as their competition decreases, and then become stable again when a new species takes the place of the old.

Let's use the California condor as an example. Before humans nearly drove it to extinction, it was the chief scavenging bird of its ecosystem. When it became extinct in its home area of California, other animals replaced it as chief scavenger bird (the turkey vulture and crow). Carcasses were eaten at a healthy pace and nature balanced itself out. In other words, the world will keep on turning even without California condors. Nature will retain its own balance without them.

But here's something that makes humans such wonderful, strange, complex creatures. Even if Nature doesn't care what happens to the condors, we do. Which is why California condors are now recovering slowly in parts of Utah. It's not that Nature can't balance itself out, it's just that we humans are sentimental (and we also love playing God).

[Karakuri]

_{Correction, Minnie: I love you after this. Lol.}

[lugailover]

I think you explained your point very well, Minnie, and it's also very refreshing to see people having civilized discussions (well, for the most part, anyway...-_-) on this thread.

Though I disagree with you on one thing, about nature not having it's own balance. Animals go extinct when they are no longer able to cope with their changing environment (whether that's climate change or human intervention). When an animal goes extinct, populations of different species fluctuate for a while as their competition decreases, and then become stable again when a new species takes the place of the old.

Let's use the California condor as an example. Before humans nearly drove it to extinction, it was the chief scavenging bird of its ecosystem. When it became extinct in its home area of California, other animals replaced it as chief scavenger bird (the turkey vulture and crow). Carcasses were eaten at a healthy pace and nature balanced itself out. In other words, the world will keep on turning even without California condors. Nature will retain its own balance without them.

But here's something that makes humans such wonderful, strange, complex creatures. Even if Nature doesn't care what happens to the condors, we do. Which is why California condors are now recovering slowly in parts of Utah. It's not that Nature can't balance itself out, it's just that we humans are sentimental (and we also love playing God).

Beautiful post Abomine. <3
I agree with you 100%