What do you think about this article from the NEW YORK TIMES!?

Well maybe that big city pro-wolf person should look at the picture in this link of a child after being attacked by a much smaller coyote;

http://www.varmintal.com/attac.htm

(near bottom of page)

Coyotes weigh only about 45 pounds, wolves can weigh up to 150lbs. A wolf can rip out the throat of a full grown moose and its jaws can snap the femur bone on large game. So imagine what a wolf would have done to that child.

The pro-wolf people are placing peoples lives in peril. Sooner or later in the lower 48 some one is going to be horribly mauled or killed by a wolf…its just a matter of time. And when that happens the pro-wolf people will be to blame for it! That blood or lost life; will be on their hands.

I am kind of taken back that some guy from New York thinks he has expertise on wolf populations on the complete other side of the states. In all fairness it was written including many facts, although some were spun with words like "slaughter" and some were misinterpreted. with a little bit of his own opinion mixed in. He could have come out and said look at what the blood-thirsty huners are focussing their evil on now, but he didn't.

To conclude I don't agree with his view, but he offered it up in a way that wasn't completely discriminate or hateful.

PS. The argument that wolves are larger than coyotes, an therefore you should just multiply coyote attack numbers, doesn't truely work as coyotes are about 10-15 times more likely to attack than a wolf.

The New York Times has a long record of anti-gun nonsense. It has lied about some things related to guns and gun laws according to some guns and hunting magazines. I do not read such Lunatic Left media sources as this.

Why do you read the New York Times, anyway? Those Manhattan "sophisticates" think we all eat dirt and marry our cousins out here in flyover country. Never seen a bigger group of elitists trying to tell the rest of us how to live.

Wolves are a part of the eco-system and food chain, and should be allowed to exist there, but should be controlled (managed) through responsible conservation practices, including hunting. That is sensible.

Reading the NY Times is akin to reading Pravda.

No link. Can't see article. Damn liberal, pansy, metro-sexuals don't know diddly.