[Vision2020] Mixed news for Wolves

[lfalen]

Mark
Some of your statements are ture and some can be questioned. The government does pay for verified losses. These things are hard to verify. As you said there has been one payment in Latah county. The loss in the Soutwick area has been considerably grater than that. In any case this is an unnecessary expense.To attribute losses to vultures is ridiculous. vultures feed on carcasses but do not kill any cattle. I have seen them eating on something that is still barely alive. But they were not the cause of death to a health animal.  Think about the size of a vulture and the size of a cow. Owls and Eagles will prey on small rodents and cats, but not on cattle.

Roger 
-----Original message-----
From: Mark Solomon msolomon at moscow.com
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:23:47 -0800
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com, "Sunil Ramalingam" sunilramalingam at hotmail.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Mixed news for Wolves

> For those who may not be aware of it, Defenders of Wildlife maintains 
> a livestock predation fund to compensate any rancher who Fish and 
> Wildlife Service says has lost stock to wolves. According to 
> information on their website, the fund has made 412 payments totaling 
> $536,985 to cover the loss of 514 cows, 1421 sheep and 57 "other 
> animals" from 1987 to 2005. One payment for cattle is listed for 
> Latah County.
> 
> The following is from the Defenders website:  
> http://www.defenders.org/wildlife/new/wolves/loss.html
> 
>      *    In the continental U.S., health issues such as respiratory 
> problems, digestive problems, calving complications and disease were 
> overwhelmingly the most significant causes of cattle death in 2005.
> 
>      * Only 0.11% of all cattle losses were due to wolf predation in 2005.
> 
>      * Coyotes killed more than 22 times more cattle than wolves 
> killed that year.
> 
>      * Domestic dogs killed almost 5 times as many cattle, and 
> vultures killed almost twice as many cattle as wolves did in 2005.
> 
>      * Theft was responsible for almost 5 times as many cattle losses 
> as were lost by wolf predation.
> 
>      * Predation by coyotes was the largest cause of sheep loss in 
> 2005, accounting for 23% of all losses, followed by health problems & 
> weather-related issues.
> 
>      * In states with wolf populations, an average of less than 2.5% 
> of sheep loss was due to predation by wolves in 2005.
> 
> I'm not going to argue that there isn't a traumatic loss when the 
> animals you've raised are killed by a wolf, but the economic loss is 
> minimized if not zeroed out by the compensation fund. Plus, when you 
> look at the causes of livestock loss listed above, wolves are way 
> down the list.
> 
> Mark
> 
> At 3:03 PM -0800 1/31/07, lfalen wrote:
> >I don't know that they have said that directly, but the loss of 
> >livestock to wolves does not seem to be of a concern or is 
> >minimized.  That is the same thing.
> >
> >Roger
> >-----Original message-----
> >From: "Sunil Ramalingam" sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:37:08 -0800
> >To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Mixed news for Wolves
> >
> >>  Roger,
> >>
> >>  How many people have said here they don't care about the livelihood of
> >>  livestock producers?
> >>
> >>  Sunil
> >>
> >>
> >>  >From: lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> >>  >Reply-To: lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> >>  >To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>  >Subject: [Vision2020] Mixed news for Wolves
> >>  >Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:01:20 -0800
> >>  >
> >>  >Will
> >>  >  I am mostly in agreement with your statements on a balance in the
> >>  >ecosystem. however I do not think that killing off old cow elk has anything
> >>  >to do with the productive of young ones. One thing that is missing is the
> >>  >disregard of the effects on livestock. I understand that you folks do not
> >>  >care about the lively hood of livestock producers, which is why you do not
> >>  >take this into consideration or downgrade it. I do not have a problem with
> >>  >maintaining some wolves, but they need to be controlled. They are much more
> >>  >dangerous than coyotes. I am a believer in multiple use. This includes
> >>  >everyone, including livestock producers. I am a supporter of The Nature
> >>  >conservancy. I used to be a member of the Audubon Society, but their views
> >>  >have became too one side. The Sierra Club has always ben too radical for
> >>  >me. As an aside, I was raised in the middle of what is called the Owyhee
> >>  >Initiative. Our place was about 50 miles from Jordan Valley, Oregon and 80
> >>  >miles from Bruneau, Idaho. I supp!
> >>  >  ort the
> >>  >Owyhee Imitative as do most of my former neighbors that still live there.
> >>  >
> >>  >Roger
> >>  >
> >>  >=======================================================
> >>  >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>  >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>  >                http://www.fsr.net
> >>  >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>  >=======================================================
> >>
> >>
> >>  =======================================================
> >  >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.  
> >>                 http://www.fsr.net                      
> >>            mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>  =======================================================
> 
>