Sarah Palin Quits

[Liebling:-)))]

Wolves are efficient predators. Most often they go after the baby moose (calves and yearlings), not the adult who are much older and learned to avoid wolves. They also rear on avg 3 youngs vs a moose single young. In other words, wolves population easily bounces back. Moose cannot if their youngs are killed by wolves.

You need to have real data research on predation rate. It's better than to make something up along the way.
http://www.wc.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/techpubs/research_pdfs/wolfpred.pdf

Accord the links of my post # 292.

There are an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 wolves in Alaska to estimated 150,000 mooses and over million caribous.

Accord the 2 links, you posted is exaggerated over wolf predation numbers. It´s not possible that around 7,000 wolves could consume more than half of the moose population (check the math, I made at my post #292).

12 - 13 moose including calf losses per year to a single wolf.

Accord Alaska Wildlife/Defenders of wildlife

The very small number of calves losses to wolf predation.

See the pictures of 7 wolves and one moose.

Wolves Taking Down a Moose King’s Outdoor World Blog


I am stick with Defenders of Wildlife because they make sense than Government. Their websites are exact what I read wolf history and Zoo.

 

[Reba]

Accord the links of my post # 292.

There are an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 wolves in Alaska to estimated 150,000 mooses and over million caribous.

Accord the 2 links, you posted is exaggerated over wolf predation numbers. It´s not possible that around 7,000 wolves could consume more than half of the moose population (check the math, I made at my post #292).

12 - 13 moose including calf losses per year to a single wolf.

I'm trying to figure this out.

7,000 wolves x 12.5 (average) moose per year = 87,500 moose

1/2 x 150,000 moose = 75,000 moose

87,500 moose killed per year is > 75,000

Therefor, wolves can kill more than 1/2 the moose population in one year, if all those figures are correct.

 

[Reba]

...I am stick with Defenders of Wildlife because they make sense than Government. Their websites are exact what I read wolf history and Zoo.

That's interesting because the top three staff members (and many of the other staff members) of Defenders of Wildlife had many years of working for the U.S. Federal government. If the government can't be trusted in the wildlife field, why did they work for it?

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I'm trying to figure this out.

7,000 wolves x 12.5 (average) moose per year = 87,500 moose

1/2 x 150,000 moose = 75,000 moose

87,500 moose killed per year is > 75,000

Therefor, wolves can kill more than 1/2 the moose population in one year, if all those figures are correct.

That´s exactly why I math after read kokonut´s 2 links which make no sense and then post the link to show you all that 7 wolves and one moose. What I said at my post #292 about kokounut´s first link...

 

[Liebling:-)))]

That's interesting because the top three staff members (and many of the other staff members) of Defenders of Wildlife had many years of working for the U.S. Federal government. If the government can't be trusted in the wildlife field, why did they work for it?

Don´t you read the links I posted at #292 ? which is different as Koknut posted.

 

[naisho]

Wondering how in the world did we end up discussing and arguing the deaths of reindeer from a thread on Palin giving up her throne as governer.

I don't know how we are able to proclaim expertise in animals and use our own deducing to prove to another why we are right or wrong as sometimes not everything is simply black and white, there are other factors involved.

I could shake up the whole discussion of population ecology bringing in terms, definitions, and niches of moose+reindeers and wolves on their factors that induce growth, emigration, death with fancy bio-terms to enforce it, such as density dependent controls or logistic growth or even coevolution but I see zero point in doing this.

We should focus on Palin, not behavior of animals as that is a discussion for bio majors/educators, which I feel that there are very few here on alldeaf. Doing so just raises their eyebrows wondering if you are a wildlife expert, I would end up asking you questions.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Oopps for my :topic: - I tried to not make further :topic: posts here...

Sorry...

*blush*

 

[kokonut]

Accord the links of my post # 292.

There are an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 wolves in Alaska to estimated 150,000 mooses and over million caribous.

Accord the 2 links, you posted is exaggerated over wolf predation numbers. It´s not possible that around 7,000 wolves could consume more than half of the moose population (check the math, I made at my post #292).

12 - 13 moose including calf losses per year to a single wolf.

Accord Alaska Wildlife/Defenders of wildlife

The very small number of calves losses to wolf predation.

See the pictures of 7 wolves and one moose.

Wolves Taking Down a Moose King’s Outdoor World Blog


I am stick with Defenders of Wildlife because they make sense than Government. Their websites are exact what I read wolf history and Zoo.

Again, you have to use actual field data on predation rate of wolf kills to animals that used radio collars to track these kills by wolves through aerial surveys to collect data on the rate of kills. Moose is the animal mostly killed for wolf consumption compared to caribou and sheep during the winters.

They have estimated that on average there were 29 moose killed per wolf pack per winter. Average wolf pack size is 6 wolves (of varying age and hierarcy). So, that means on average 5 moose were killed in order to sustain one wolf each winter in order to survive. A 5:1 ratio average (5 moose kill for each wolf). You need to understand something, Liebling, more food is required in the winter time to survive. Alaska's winter is long. There is no way one wolf can survive eating only one moose a month during the winter!! It is not their nature after eating a moose to stand around. They go for fresh kills while the meat and organs are still warm. Meat freezes up in a hurry in an Alaskan winter! Secondly, do you realize how much territory they cover? Do you understand about the calories consumption required to keep a wolf alive and healthy? The freezing weather factor on meat? The snow depths and how it affect their territory hunting grounds? Apparently not. Yet, approximately 62% of the moose killed were younger than 2 years old with the majority of the young kills going after the calves. Wolves have been documented numerous times showing them to be extremely efficient predators. And if a wolf population quickly goes up that means the moose population will quickly go down, and when wolf population goes up that means more problems for everybody in terms of passing on animal diseases, attacking people, their dogs, depleting their food supply (e.g. moose for their meat) that native Alaskans depend on and so on.

Wolves are pack animals. They work together to go after a single kill. But that 7 wolves taking down one moose means that 7 of those wolves get to share that moose meat and it goes away quickly. Moose is easier prey than a caribou. They go after moose more often than caribou.

Yeah, you better check your math. I can see it's not your strong suit.

Next time, use survey data reports for predation rate. Not some made up statistics that do not make any sense.

Next time, use real hard data that you can use and back up.

 

[kokonut]

Anyway, it's a myth that Palin hunts wolves from a helicopter.

 

[Jiro]

Anyway, it's a myth that Palin hunts wolves from a helicopter.

and not a fact either.

 

[Foxrac]

Rather it'd be an opportunity for her to run once Obama managed to ruin America's economy.

And they're already talking about a 2nd stimulus package, too! Money we do not even have at all. What better way to ruin Democrats run for Congress in 2010, and 2012.

You are very behind, man.

Obama said NO second stimulus package, also you don't understand about economy stimulus package either, you just got excuse to blame on Obama.

 

[kokonut]

You are very behind, man.

Obama said NO second stimulus package, also you don't understand about economy stimulus package either, you just got excuse to blame on Obama.

Obama put his John Hancock signature on that stimulus bill, so he's in this deep way over head. Deep doo doo.

You might want to explain how I "don't understand about economy stimulus package." I'd be interested in seeing how you "know" this.

Tell me, how much of the $780 billion dollars have been spent so far? How much are expected to be spent this year for 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 from that package? Do you seriously believe that this package was designed to be spent all at once for 2009 only? Is that what you're saying?

 

[pek1]

 

[Steel X]

Do u even know why Obama said no second stimulus package?

because we are trying to be careful with the money. Ever thought of that?

 

[pek1]

Do u even know why Obama said no second stimulus package?

because we are trying to be careful with the money. Ever thought of that?

 

[Foxrac]

You said professional writer, it don't make sense about you act like little child.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Palin says she's not leaving politics

She says she's eager to campaign for others

WASHINGTON - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she's not only staying involved in national politics, but she plans to jump back into the national scrum when she leaves office at the end of the month.

The former Republican vice presidential nominee said she plans to write a book, campaign for political candidates from coast to coast — even Democrats who share her views on limited government, national defense and energy independence — and build a right-of-center coalition.

"I will go around the country on behalf of candidates who believe in the right things, regardless of their party label or affiliation," she said during an interview published Sunday in The Washington Times.

Palin shocked critics and allies alike when she announced on July 3 that she would leave the governor's office while in the middle of her first term. The governor chose not to seek re-election and suggested it was unfair to hold onto the office as a lame duck. Instead, she will step down July 26 and pursue a national profile. She has not said whether she is building toward a presidential campaign for 2012.

'Alaska would be better off'

Republican Women Federated of Simi Valley announced Palin was scheduled to speak to the group's private gala on Aug. 8 at the Ronal Reagan Presidential Library in California. The event — reporters will not be allowed to attend — will take place in an airplane hangar that houses a retired presidential aircraft Air Force One and will stir more questions about he curious resignation.

Palin defended the decision because "pragmatically, Alaska would be better off" if her state weren't spending time on ethical complaints against her. She also said the plan to resign had been in the works for months.

Her 2008 running mate disputed suggestions the telegenic and plainspoken soon-to-be-former-official was a quitter.

"Oh, I don't think she quit," said Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in 2008 who plucked Palin out of near-obscurity and made her a household name. "I think she changed her priorities."

For now, though, Palin isn't detailing those priorities.

"I'm not ruling out anything. It is the way I have lived my life from the youngest age," she said in the Washington Times interview. "Let me peek out there and see if there's an open door somewhere. And if there's even a little crack of light, I'll hope to plow through it."

The self-described hockey mom plans to write a memoir but declined to discuss any potential deal for her to become a television commentator.

"I can't talk about any of those things while I'm still governor," she said.

'Even my own son is not a Republican'
Yet she's already reminding audiences of her bipartisan and family-oriented appeal.

"People are so tired of the partisan stuff even my own son is not a Republican," Palin said.

Like his father, 20-year-old Track Palin is registered as "nonpartisan" in Alaska, she said.

McCain said he believes Palin will play a major role in politics, telling NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that "she has the ability to ignite our party and to galvanize us and get us going again and give us a strong positive message."

That said, McCain declined to endorse a Palin for President campaign.

"We've got a lot of good, strong, young, attractive, articulate spokespersons for our party and our principles," McCain said, citing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Palin says she's not leaving politics - More politics- msnbc.com

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Is Palin under a financial burden?
As she leaves office, she has repeatedly cited cost of defending herself

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Since Sarah Palin abruptly resigned as governor, she has repeatedly cited the bombardment of ethics complaints against her while conceding the financial burden of defending herself had taken its toll.

Palin says her family has racked up more than $500,000 in legal fees and the state has poured about $2 million of taxpayer money into investigating the complaints. Just last month, her handlers made a plea for supporters around the nation to donate money to her legal defense fund.

But just how much of a financial burden has been inflicted on the Palins and Alaska?

The governor's family is financially comfortable, but far from rich. She and her husband earned more than $200,000 last year, nowhere near enough to support a family of six and pay a mounting legal tab.

But the Palins have other assets and financial prospects: Their home is valued at $500,000 to $1 million, she has a book deal that could easily be in the millions, and Palin can make millions more with speaking tours and media opportunities.

She can also tap her immense popularity among the Republican base and raise tens of thousands of dollars to pay off legal bills with very little effort. An Internet campaign raised $130,000 from supporters in just two weeks.

"There were people who couldn't pay that much, who said they were in between jobs and really can't afford to do this, but they gave 10 bucks, 25 bucks, because they believe in her," said Rebecca Mansour, editor of Conservatives 4 Palin, an Internet group that led the recent webathon on behalf of the fund trust.

The cost of the ethics complaints to the state is a bigger financial issue. The state provided a breakdown of the $1.9 million cost this week, with the "Troopergate" scandal, staff lawyer research and public records requests making up a large portion of the cost. Palin says the series of complaints distracted staff from doing real work for the state, and the money could be spent on more useful things, such as roads, cops and energy and fish research. The state has spent $296,000 just on independent lawyers to investigate complaints, said Linda Perez, administrative director for the governor's office.

Still, the $1.9 million cited pales in comparison to the $730 million the state spent last fall to distribute $1,200 in energy relief to every Alaskan. The state's overall budget for the 2010 fiscal year is more than $10 billion.

The ethics grievances are still piling up, with the latest filed this week against the former GOP vice presidential candidate. Sixteen ethics complaints have been filed. Three are still pending, the others have all been dismissed — although one was resolved when Palin agreed to reimburse the state more than $8,000 for the costs associated with nine trips taken with her children.

A hint of her frustration
In her latest financial disclosure, the ethics complaints loom large as a money drain for Palin. In a section that asks her to list outstanding debts, Palin lists the name of her law firm and follows up with a handwritten explanation that offers a hint of her frustration:

"As governor of the state of Alaska I have accrued bills for legal representation concerning false, wasteful and frivilous (sic) allegations," she wrote in her March statement. "To defend my actions as Governor my family has amassed hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees."

As governor, Palin's annual salary is $125,000, plus she reported collecting another $6,891 last year in per diem payments while staying in her Wasilla home instead of the governor's mansion in Juneau. She also reported she and her family received at least $5,500 in checks larger than $250 sent by supporters during her run as John McCain's running mate.

At the time her report was submitted, Palin said the checks had not been cashed and that her family still had not opened envelopes that filled dozens of boxes.

"Those boxes contain more letters of support and may even contain more gifts," she wrote.

Her husband, Todd, earned more than $86,000 in 2008 between commercial fishing and a part-time job as an oil production operator for BP Alaska in Prudhoe Bay. He also earned $5,600 in snowmobile race winnings and an undisclosed discount on snowmobiles from racing sponsor Arctic Cat.

In addition, her six-member family collected $19,614 in annual state oil royalties and the energy relief. Last year's take amounted to a record $3,269 per person.

Palin also received a bundle of gifts last year, including Christmas dishes, angel statues, a gold ring and DVDs from random people, according to her financial disclosure. CNBC gave her clothes and shoes for an outdoor interview, and an Anchorage eye care center gave her eyeglass frames a month before the election, valued at $349.

Another boost for Palin is the Alaska Fund Trust, which was established by supporters in April to help Palin pay her legal bills.

Eagle River resident Kim Chatman filed an ethics complaint, which remains active, alleging Palin is misusing the governor's office for personal gain by securing unwarranted benefits and receiving improper gifts through the fund. As far as Chatman is concerned, Palin would rather resign than give up that pool of money should she be found culpable. Chatman doesn't believe Palin's explanation that she is stepping down to save a job shackled by a vicious political climate.

‘Woe is me, poor little me’
"I feel like she's using her national popularity to gain financially from her base and she's using emotional tactics, like 'woe is me, poor little me,'" Chatman said. "I don't buy her sacrificing."

Supporters obviously do. The recent donation drive brought in pledges totaling $130,000 despite the $150 limit, Mansour said. Managers of the fund aren't saying how much has been collected since it was created.

"I cannot fault somebody for saying this is not good for the state," Mansour said. "She could have kept going. She has this legal defense fund. It would get paid eventually ... However the cost to the state would have kept going. And I don't think that's something she could have lived with."

Is Palin under a financial burden? - More politics- msnbc.com

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Again, you have to use actual field data on predation rate of wolf kills to animals that used radio collars to track these kills by wolves through aerial surveys to collect data on the rate of kills. Moose is the animal mostly killed for wolf consumption compared to caribou and sheep during the winters.

They have estimated that on average there were 29 moose killed per wolf pack per winter. Average wolf pack size is 6 wolves (of varying age and hierarcy). So, that means on average 5 moose were killed in order to sustain one wolf each winter in order to survive. A 5:1 ratio average (5 moose kill for each wolf). You need to understand something, Liebling, more food is required in the winter time to survive. Alaska's winter is long. There is no way one wolf can survive eating only one moose a month during the winter!! It is not their nature after eating a moose to stand around. They go for fresh kills while the meat and organs are still warm. Meat freezes up in a hurry in an Alaskan winter! Secondly, do you realize how much territory they cover? Do you understand about the calories consumption required to keep a wolf alive and healthy? The freezing weather factor on meat? The snow depths and how it affect their territory hunting grounds? Apparently not. Yet, approximately 62% of the moose killed were younger than 2 years old with the majority of the young kills going after the calves. Wolves have been documented numerous times showing them to be extremely efficient predators. And if a wolf population quickly goes up that means the moose population will quickly go down, and when wolf population goes up that means more problems for everybody in terms of passing on animal diseases, attacking people, their dogs, depleting their food supply (e.g. moose for their meat) that native Alaskans depend on and so on.

Wolves are pack animals. They work together to go after a single kill. But that 7 wolves taking down one moose means that 7 of those wolves get to share that moose meat and it goes away quickly. Moose is easier prey than a caribou. They go after moose more often than caribou.

Yeah, you better check your math. I can see it's not your strong suit.

Next time, use survey data reports for predation rate. Not some made up statistics that do not make any sense.

Next time, use real hard data that you can use and back up.

Check my post #62 at wolf history thread.


http://www.alldeaf.com/topic-debates/57180-wolf-history-3.html#post1373351

 

[pek1]

You said professional writer, it don't make sense about you act like little child.

Didn't you read what I was laughing about? Just because I'm a writer doesn't mean that I don't or can't laugh. Obama wants to all of a sudden be fiscally conservative in spending money. Don't you see the irony of that?