Why Wolves

[Matryoshka524]

Well, I love all animals so it’s no surprise I like wolves too
But
I like them because they are gorgeous, intelligent animals. It always amazes me how wolves can work so well together as a pack even though they communicate much differently than we do

[Noctis_]

Wolves are boring, over-marketed, and cliche. I like coyotes and deer. Deer are more aesthetically interesting for me, and coyotes are more clever, more adaptable, and can be more diverse than wolves. Plus they look cooler.

The animals themselves aren't inherently 'overmarketed' or 'cliche'; People make them that way, so I think it's a little unfair to put down wolves as a species for this reason. But I do agree, there is a lot of marketing and commercial use of wolves in many different ways, so that can wear them out for some people. As for wolves being 'boring', that's subjective, but I think that the amount and type of wolf content you surround yourself with has a part to play in that.

As for my personal interest in wolves, much of it has to do with the ecological role of wolves, and the preservation of an important predator in the face of the wolf controversy. I think the wolf situation and history in the United States is an interesting one, and one that can teach us a lesson about human nature and humankind's attitude towards the natural world.

[Koa]

The animals themselves aren't inherently 'overmarketed' or 'cliche'; People make them that way, so I think it's a little unfair to put down wolves as a species for this reason. But I do agree, there is a lot of marketing and commercial use of wolves in many different ways, so that can wear them out for some people. As for wolves being 'boring', that's subjective, but I think that the amount and type of wolf content you surround yourself with has a part to play in that.

As for my personal interest in wolves, much of it has to do with the ecological role of wolves, and the preservation of an important predator in the face of the wolf controversy. I think the wolf situation and history in the United States is an interesting one, and one that can teach us a lesson about human nature and humankind's attitude towards the natural world. There's a book, "Never Cry Wolf", written by Farley Mowat and published in 1963, originally intended to be a political satire but ending up being instead a work honoring wolves and grieving humankind's treatment of them (at the time of the book's publication, wolves were eradicated in much of the United States). I actually posted a topic about it, located here: http://wolfquest.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=84073.
I think the story of the wolf has a lot of food for thought.

Perhaps Never Cry Wolf gives background to the story of the wolf during a time when it yes, had not recovered in the United States, and one could find merit in its portrayal of human attitudes. However, given its slant towards highlighting humankind's mistreatment of the wolf, it's probably not the best book today to suggest by way of giving food for thought (with specific relation to the wolf, not humankind): it's outdated, fictitious (as highlighted in the thread), and frankly irrelevant to the wolf's drastically different situation it faces now. One could easily find information on the historic eradication of the wolf in one of Mech's books without that very slant. Indeed, background and context is important, but if you can find that very information while avoiding bias, it sounds to me that one need not read such a book unless they were interested in human attitude back then alone, and nothing more.

[Noctis_]

Perhaps Never Cry Wolf gives background to the story of the wolf during a time when it yes, had not recovered in the United States, and one could find merit in its portrayal of human attitudes. However, given its slant towards highlighting humankind's mistreatment of the wolf, it's probably not the best book today to suggest by way of giving food for thought (with specific relation to the wolf, not humankind): it's outdated, fictitious (as highlighted in the thread), and frankly irrelevant to the wolf's drastically different situation it faces now. One could easily find information on the historic eradication of the wolf in one of Mech's books without that very slant. Indeed, background and context is important, but if you can find that very information while avoiding bias, it sounds to me that one need not read such a book unless they were interested in human attitude back then alone, and nothing more.

My intention was never to say the book was accurate in describing wolves as a species, or to be specifically relevant to wolves alone (the intended connection was between wolves and humans historically), and yes- the book is as you describe it, and does not paint an accurate present-day picture of the species or its situation. "Background to the story of the wolf" and "human attitude back then" were, in fact, what I was trying to present; I apologize if what I said was taken to mean otherwise.

[LamarWolf]

I have loved wolves for many years now and thinking back I can't remember why? So I'm asking the world. Why wolves?

I don't remember why I like wolves too but I have done a lot of research on them for along time and I can answer most wolf questions.