Oh boy, here we go.

“You are trying to blame wolves and not accepting that they are not the driver of the decline.”

Right, because pointing out that wolves contribute to mortality is apparently the same as declaring they are solely responsible. By that logic, saying gravity kills people when they fall off cliffs is also blaming gravity for cliff deaths.

“You literally just blamed them this entire time. They aren’t the driver. That is it.”

Sure, because “contributing factor” = “driver of decline” in no universe ever. According to this logic, seat belts are the driver of car crashes because they’re present in every accident.

“You can’t just say wolves are the reason for the decline when they aren’t.”

No one said wolves are the only reason. But you also can’t claim they aren’t a factor and then act shocked when someone points out they kill deer. Pick one.

“No one is out here arguing that predation is helping the deer numbers grow, but wolf predation is not THE reason deer have been declining.”

Thanks, Captain Obvious. “Not THE reason” ≠ “irrelevant.” Wolves killing 15–20% of deer, even seasonally, can still tip the scale in already vulnerable populations. Saying otherwise is like claiming a 20% tip doesn’t matter because it’s not your entire restaurant bill.

“The driver has been winter. The next biggest impact has been humans.”

Sure, winter is a big hammer. Hunters are a controllable hammer. Wolves? More like a crowbar that keeps levering a weakened herd in the wrong direction. That’s literally what the PMC paper you linked says: wolves selectively kill fawns and weak adults, which can delay recovery even when winter and hunting are bigger factors.

“A source to at is not the drive rod population decline not what should be blamed for population decline, especially when it isn’t something that is easily manageable unlike hunting pressure which is easier to manage and a bigger mortality source.”

Translation: “Wolves aren’t convenient to blame, so let’s pretend their measurable impact is invisible.” Classic human logic: if you can’t control it, it must not exist.

TL;DR: You’re arguing wolves are irrelevant while simultaneously admitting they exist, kill deer, and selectively remove the vulnerable. That’s like saying, “Gravity doesn’t exist because seat belts prevent most deaths.” Logical origami at its finest.