Talk:Mexican wolf/Archive 1

Archive 1

Mexican wolf map...

anyone else notice something funny about the picture with the map? Binarypower 09:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

"Trappers and private trappers"

"Trappers and private trappers have also helped in the eradication of the Mexican Wolf." Is there some distinction between a "trapper" and a "private trapper" of which I'm not aware? This just seems redundant. -- Super Aardvark 17:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Trapper is probably referring to a Government Trapper. The government also hired or paid bounties to private trappers as well. We are redeveloping our content on our website www.californiawolfcenter.org and www.mexicanwolfconservationfund.org (under construction) and when we do I am happy to have that cut and paste to this area if it helps. We are part of the recovery program through the Species Survival Plan and the Mexican Wolf Conservation Fund. (Ssp1ab 21:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC))

hahaha mexican wolf is awsome!!!!

the mexican loves ppl that aare , mexican and awesome like tiana —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.193.35.118 (talk) 03:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Conservation status

I cannot find where the IUCN has assessed the conservation status of the Mexican Wolf. Canis lupus is rated as of "Least concern", while noting that "at regional level, several wolf populations are seriously threatened." I am commenting out the conservation status until someone can point to the IUCN assessment for this sub-species. -- Donald Albury 14:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

In Mexico

I removed the following statement from the lede: "It is currently being protected by the mexican government and Now extends from the sonora desert to the center of mexico." I did find news items about plans to release captive-bred wolves in northern Mexico, but as far as I can see, those plans are on hold. -- Donald Albury 12:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

ESA????

I think the page is inappropriately linked to the Ecological Society of America, which has no authority to list species. The "ESA" is the Endangered Species Act. The wolf was listed as endangered in 1976 under the Endangered Species Act. 75.105.199.53 (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Inaccurate information without citation to source

Contrary to the article, ranching in the southwestern USA did not precede ranching in Mexico. No source is cited for the claim that it did. In fact when Francisco Vasquez de Coronado made his 1542 entrada he brought with him at least 1,500 head of various types of livestock, as indicated in the narrative written by Pedro Reyes de Castañeda of Nájera. Previously, there were no cattle in the USA. Had it not been for ranching in Mexico it would not have existed in the USA until much later. The Spanish introduced cattle into Mexico.Backwardlook (talk) 10:13, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Mexican wolf

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Mexican wolf's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

<b>Reference named "iucn":</b><ul>
<li>From [[Endangered species]]: {{IUCN2009.2 |assessors=Abramov, A., Belant, J. & Wozencraft, C. |year=2009 |id=9561 |title=Gulo gulo |downloaded=2010-01-25}}</li>
<li>From [[Coyote]]: {{IUCN2008|assessors=Sillero-Zubiri & Hoffmann|year=2008|id=3745|title=Canis latrans|downloaded=May 5, 2008}}</li>
<li>From [[Subspecies of Canis lupus]]: {{IUCN2011.1|assessors=Mech, L.D., Boitani, L. |year=2008 |id=3746 |title=Canis lupus |downloaded=12 August 2011}}</li>
<li>From [[Eastern wolf]]: {{cite web|author=Kelly, B.T.|author2=eyer, A. |author3=Phillips, M.K. |date=2008|title= ''Canis rufus.'' In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. |url=http://www.iucnredlist.org|accessdate=2 April 2014}}</li>
<li>From [[Gray wolf]]: {{IUCN |assessors=Mech, L.D., Boitani, L. (IUCN SSC Wolf Specialist Group) |year=2010 |id=3746 |title=Canis lupus|version=2011.2}}</li>
</ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:49, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Plagarism

This page was directly plagarized from, [1]. This is fairly obvious considering the last paragraph reads like a report from a non-profit group.

Ok, so I fixed a lot of the plagarism problems, which consisted of condensing, rewording and reorganizing the available material. But this article still needs a lot of work. I think there are a few government and private sources to draw from if anyone wants to take a stab at it.Asedzie 08:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry! So I've realized that only the second section 'Near to Extinction' was taken from the Living Desert website verbatim. I've tried to revert as much as possible of what had been written. I did write what I thought in the talk page before I reverted earlier, but no one responded to my concerns. assholes are gay!!!! l.o.o))))*^$#&

Signed and dated for archiving purposes only. William Harris • (talk) • 11:51, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Arizona Daily article

The article from ADI in 2015 covers a 2013 article from the website of "The Southern Arizona Cattlemen’s Protective Association." That website quotes one person's view from 1997(!) that the questioned wolves were wolf dogs. The FWS response was that the genetics committee was happy that these were Mexican wolves. There is no science in one person's point of view but there is science in genetic testing: "all of the lineages consist of Mexican wolves, and none of them appear to have ancestry from dogs or coyotes." - http://www.tau.ac.il/~geffene/PDFs/23-Zoo_Biol_1997.pdf The opinion presented by the cattle industry is rebutted on the facts. This is an event from 20 years ago, therefore I have removed the sentence from this article. Happy to discuss further. William Harris • (talk) • 21:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

"Regardless if they sewed them or not, they did find some evidence that this species may be a hybird" I have no idea what "sewed" is referring to in this context - please explain. Who are "they", specifically? Which study are you referring to? William Harris • (talk) • 09:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Truckfan1990, I am not sure how you deal with things in Crawfordville, Florida but here in the international arena you are required to comply with Wikipedia policies. You appear to be reluctant to explain your edit - please do so. It is difficult to reach a WP:CONSENSUS with another editor when they refuse to participate in discussion. William Harris • (talk) • 09:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

You appear to be unfamiliar with the purpose of a Talk page, so I have provided a link in the View History of the article to here. This is where you discuss your point of view. I will be pleased to hear it. William Harris • (talk) • 08:36, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Your statement has been reverted once again because it is factually incorrect. "There has been some evidence researchers from the Arizona Game & Fish found in 2015..." Only the first paragraph of the article refers to AGF and the need for an updated recovery plan, the rest of the article about hybrids comes from the Southern Arizona Cattlemen’s Protective Association website that is not WP:RELIABLE. Please read the article again, very carefully. William Harris • (talk) • 21:39, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Mexican Wolf's Taxonomy is similar to the Red Wolf's taxonomy

A 2015 genetic study showed that there is some evidence that the captive bred and wild Mexican wolves are actually wolf-dog hybrids or wolf-coyote hybrids which would make them ineligible for protection under the Endangered Species Act. . Like the Red Wolf's taxonomy, it appears that the Mexican wolf's taxonomy has not been fully determined. Just read this article properly and you'll see what I'm talking about and why I add this content.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.163.133.174 (talk • contribs)

Except that you appear to be ignoring concerns that the 2015 paper you keep referring to is Wikipedia:UNRELIABLE.--Mr Fink (talk) 22:07, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for finally communicating, now we might get somewhere together.

As quoted from Cronin: "...may have included dog ancestry (although genetic data indicate this is improbable and/or of small genetic importance). May means nothing, show me the direct evidence. This is the English-speaking world's online encylopedia - we need to be very accurate in what we are saying and cannot by putting up unclear nor unsupported points of view, even from scientists. Especially those scientists whose Figure 4 in their study shows a genetic phylotree with dogs and coyotes clustering together separately to the wolves - does that sound correct to you? Cronin makes this statement and cites Moreno 1996 and Hedrick 1997 to support it - he did not make any finding himself in this regard. Moreno 1996 concluded that "None of the surveyed individuals from the uncertified lineages had domestic dog or coyote marker alleles,...". Hendrick 1997 concluded: "all of the lineages consist of Mexican wolves, and none of them appear to have ancestry from dogs or coyotes." So on what basis is Cronin making this statement? Cronin has just become an unreliable source. The cattlemen's website did not mention Moreno 1996 nor Hedrick 1997 and so did not maintain a neutral point of view which makes them an unreliable source. [Personally, I would love to find evidence of recent dog admixture, because the dog lineage is older than the Mexican wolf lineage and therefore that would easily explain why the Mexican wolf appears to be genetically Basal (biology) to all other North American wolf species, which is a mystery. Alas, there is no strong evidence for it yet. This is why I am so persistent on this point - it is much bigger than a simple conservation issue with the cattle ranchers in Arizona.]

As for the issue of a separate subspecies, this article is badged under WikiProject Mammals (above) so we are required to be guided by MSW3 - which recognizes the Mexican wolf as a separate subspecies - unless there is strong evidence otherwise. Cronin is not strong evidence otherwise. William Harris • (talk) • 10:08, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

A note for your personal development on Wikipedia, if I should be so presumptuous. I will place it here rather than your user page because you no longer log in. First, you have in the past put up uncited text elsewhere, and we have had our differences over that. Now you have provided references which is a step forward, but you would be well advised to focus on reliable sources. We now find that your position has shifted from what "researchers from Arizona Game and Fish" said - which led to my reversions - to what a group of evolutionary biologists said in a published study. You would be wise to focus on reliable sources to begin with, of which Cronin should have been but the cattlemen's website - and the ADI for that matter - is not. So if we now focus on Cronin and assumed that he was right, you need to ask yourself if there is any research that disagrees with him? Yes, there is - Moreno 1996 and Hedrick 1997 which he himself has supplied. Why is there a difference of opinion? It could be that they used different samples, with Hedrick limited to looking at the wolves from the 3 breeding facilities about which the original "its a hybrid" conjecture was made, and Moreno looking a little wider. It could be that Cronin used wider samples and with better technology available in 2014. So now on the other side, you need to look for any other research that supports Cronin in some manner. Did you do that? (I assume not, because if you had you would have been amazingly surprised!) Please comment back. William Harris • (talk) • 21:48, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Untitled

I started the Mexican Wolf site -- Hurricane Devon (Talk), September 20, 2005

Signed and dated for archiving purposes only. William Harris • (talk) • 10:18, 27 October 2017 (UTC)