[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
Oh wait, that is the same strain as here except we have twice as many. With zero attacks on humans.
[/quote]
“Zero,” huh?
Some smart guy fast forwarded through the entire thread.
[/quote]
In Michigan. Some smart guy has reading comprehension problems.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
Oh wait, that is the same strain as here except we have twice as many. With zero attacks on humans.
[/quote]
“Zero,” huh?
Some smart guy fast forwarded through the entire thread.
[/quote]
In Michigan. Some smart guy has reading comprehension problems.
[/quote]
That’s only one of his problems.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
Oh wait, that is the same strain as here except we have twice as many. With zero attacks on humans.
[/quote]
“Zero,” huh?
Some smart guy fast forwarded through the entire thread.
[/quote]
In Michigan. Some smart guy has reading comprehension problems.
[/quote]
Not a chance Michigan has more wolves than the PacNorthwest. Nope.
Your abacus got hung up somewhere.[/quote]
Quit moving the goalposts he said Washington, not the PacNorthwest.
Michigan has slightly more wolves than Montana, and more people, and less wilderness. Yet no fatalities.
Whether you believe it or not is really not relevant unless you have evidence to the contrary.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
Michigan has slightly more wolves than Montana, and more people, and less wilderness. Yet no fatalities.
[/quote]
I have a feeling Michigan wolves have something in common with Michigan people.
[/quote]
Apparently it is superior intelligence to those in montana. Just like the people.
And all this time I thought dog was man’s best friend.
Thought this was terribly interesting and didn’t want to start another wolf thread.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Thought this was terribly interesting and didn’t want to start another wolf thread.[/quote]
Good stuff.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Thought this was terribly interesting and didn’t want to start another wolf thread.[/quote]
Good stuff.[/quote]
X2!
.
[quote]on edge wrote:
When I was a kid another kid in the neighborhood had a wolf/shepherd hybrid for a short time. It was the scariest dog I’ve ever crossed paths with. It was freaking huge and aggressive as fuck. The dog basically watched everyone like a hawk and if anyone made the slightest movement toward Joey he would be going ape shit trying to get at them. Joey would just say “if he breaks that chain you’re dead”. [/quote]
Then sounds like the K-9 that attacked me on Christmas when I was in 2-3rd grade. Actual police dog, snapped the chain (flimsy chain) and jumped the back tire of my brand new bike and yanked me off. Good thing my dad was near by and chased the dog away. My mother being evil had the dogs head chopped off to check for rabies. If my dad wasn’t there I would have likely been dead as it was heading for my head/neck area.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Reminds me of this recent article. What did the guy think was gonna happen?
Just read this. I like when the cop says, they think they got the croc responsibile…
What that SHOULD have said, was that Mr. Cole was responsible for the outcome. The croc just did what they do best, pick out the easiest food source, and go for it. Grab it, drag it to the bottom, and let it drown, then proceed to eat it. I like how an animal gets punished for someone else being on the short end of the gene pool.
Darwin award right there.[/quote]
Ya, it pisses me off every time an animal is put down for doing exactly what it’s designed to do. [/quote]
Because a hunter does exactly what it’s designed to do?
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[/quote]
I can understand people killing the wolves if their population is out of control or they are ranchers suffering losses. I get that. What I don’t get is how shooting a wolf from distance with a high-powered rifle and optics is considered sporting.
[quote]Will207 wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[/quote]
I can understand people killing the wolves if their population is out of control or they are ranchers suffering losses. I get that. What I don’t get is how shooting a wolf from distance with a high-powered rifle and optics is considered sporting.
[/quote]
Why do you think they did? Almost all of my hunts ended within 100 yards (except my 400 yard shot to take down a sustenance kill). My bear kill was 15-20 yards away. My Javelin kills were a few feet away from me…to being right on top of them with a revolver. So, just because someone has a high-powered rifle (what you want them to try to take down a wolf with a .22LR?) and optics (most rifles have optics unless you design it not to) means they laid down a mile long shot to take down a wolf?
Do you even hunt?