[Vision2020] Mixed news for Wolves

Wed Jan 31 16:20:41 PST 2007

Roger,

The same conclusion you reach when seeing vultures preying on a sick 
animal also apply to other predators, wolves included: predators tend 
to prey on animals that take the least energy to bring down - the 
sick, old and newborn.

Mark

At 3:41 PM -0800 1/31/07, lfalen wrote:
>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
>>  >>  =======================================================
>>
>>