the "so what" was directed to your claim that wolves are better then lions for the ungulates because lions eat more. and I pointed out ,so what, both are bad.
but we both know you knew what I meant.
you can call it knee jerk but my statement is still true.
the only purpose the reintroduction of wolves served, is the ultimate destruction of hunting.
If that's how you interpreted my post, that's on me that the message wasn't clear...not what I was trying to say regarding knee jerk reaction.
Too often, there is knee jerk reactions to wildlife management in general. Solid data and research help to ensure that doesn't happen.
It makes a whole bunch of sense to understand what's going on before we make decisions regarding wildlife management. Classic case is the lion study conducted in the Bitterroot...it was assumed by most (me included) that wolves were impacting calf elk the most...turned out that wasn't true.
I'm all about getting the horse in front of the cart...makes management much more effective, more cost effective, and actually leads you to a desired result.
Also, for the record, if the purpose of reintroducing wolves was to end hunting (which it wasn't)...consider that failed policy and mission not close to accomplished.
Gave myself and others another species to hunt though...