Anyone want to talk some sense into this guy?

Mt_elk

FNG
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
42
An elk hunter welcomes wolves

I don't even live in Colorado and this pisses me off. Living in Montana, I've seen the impact wolves have had on our elk and would hate to see this happen to Colorado. Somebody debate this guy on a podcast or something. Probably one of the most egregious examples of hunters eating their own is to supporting the reintroduction of wolves into a declining elk population. So many issues with this.
 

jolemons

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
1,013
Location
MT, USA
I agree with him philosophically. I am also selfish and want robust wild game populations to hunt myself. It's a complicated issue. If humans are going to manage prey populations, the same needs to happen with predators, or else the human take wil need to be reduced proportionate to the take of the other predators. CO is having a calf recruitment problem that I would like to see them resolve before reintroducing another predator on the landscape.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Ucsdryder

WKR
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
5,995
Pro wolfers always create this fantasy, fairytale story about this beautiful symbiotic relationship where the wolves and elk and moose live happily ever after. It’s like a children’s movies, Lion King, where the animals give themselves to the wolves for the betterment of the “wild”. The story they don’t tell is the real story. Wolves don’t hunt the weak. Wolves hunt everything. Wolves don’t selectively kill just 1 animal to feed the pack. They kill every animal they can. Wolves don’t selectively kill animals creating a better ratio of male to female, calves to cows, elk to acreage, etc. They kill whatever they can. The fact that we let people vote on science is asinine. The fact that biologists with Colorado parks and wildlife aren’t allowed to give their EXPERT opinions is asinine.

Anybody who is pro-wolf should trade their weapons for hiking sticks and birding binoculars and be forced to live in boulder. Or better yet, San Francisco.

669E6229-1D1B-4905-81AB-3C164CDCD3EA.jpeg59003F5C-E9D7-4347-8D00-AC6E5689B023.jpeg
 

ewade07

WKR
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
1,507
Location
MONTANA
Any data out there of human impact on elk recruitment in Colorado? Curious to see if any studies have been done.
 

jolemons

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
1,013
Location
MT, USA
Pro wolfers always create this fantasy, fairytale story about this beautiful symbiotic relationship where the wolves and elk and moose live happily ever after. It’s like a children’s movies, Lion King, where the animals give themselves to the wolves for the betterment of the “wild”. The story they don’t tell is the real story. Wolves don’t hunt the weak. Wolves hunt everything. Wolves don’t selectively kill just 1 animal to feed the pack. They kill every animal they can. Wolves don’t selectively kill animals creating a better ratio of male to female, calves to cows, elk to acreage, etc. They kill whatever they can. The fact that we let people vote on science is asinine. The fact that biologists with Colorado parks and wildlife aren’t allowed to give their EXPERT opinions is asinine.

Anybody who is pro-wolf should trade their weapons for hiking sticks and birding binoculars and be forced to live in boulder. Or better yet, San Francisco.

View attachment 224056View attachment 224057
The recent research that my company has completed actually indicates that the majority of wolf kills are on prey whose bone marrow indicates the presence of illness, disease or lameness. This study was confined to a 50k acre area populated with grizzly, wolf, lion, bison, elk and deer in Montana. Healthy animals are killed as well, but they represent a proportionately smaller data set.

Many biologists that I am colleagues with would argue in favor of apex predators. The major sources of contention would be inability to manage predator populations due to protected status and that the Feds get involved which adds a lot of unnecessary red tape.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

FLAK

WKR
Joined
Jan 22, 2014
Messages
2,287
Location
Gulf Coast
Pro wolfers always create this fantasy, fairytale story about this beautiful symbiotic relationship where the wolves and elk and moose live happily ever after. It’s like a children’s movies, Lion King, where the animals give themselves to the wolves for the betterment of the “wild”. The story they don’t tell is the real story. Wolves don’t hunt the weak. Wolves hunt everything. Wolves don’t selectively kill just 1 animal to feed the pack. They kill every animal they can. Wolves don’t selectively kill animals creating a better ratio of male to female, calves to cows, elk to acreage, etc. They kill whatever they can. The fact that we let people vote on science is asinine. The fact that biologists with Colorado parks and wildlife aren’t allowed to give their EXPERT opinions is asinine.

Anybody who is pro-wolf should trade their weapons for hiking sticks and birding binoculars and be forced to live in boulder. Or better yet, San Francisco.

View attachment 224056View attachment 224057
Wow, look at all those sick elk laid out.
 

Ucsdryder

WKR
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
5,995
The recent research that my company has completed actually indicates that the majority of wolf kills are on prey whose bone marrow indicates the presence of illness, disease or lameness. This study was confined to a 50k acre area populated with grizzly, wolf, lion, bison, elk and deer in Montana. Healthy animals are killed as well, but they represent a proportionately smaller data set.
Many biologists that I am colleagues with would argue in favor of apex predators. The major sources of contention would be inability to manage predator populations due to protected status and that the Feds get involved which adds a lot of unnecessary red tape.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
how do you explain entire herds that have been decimated? Maybe you’re right and they go after the sick first. Then what? What happens when they kill the sick animals? Do they stop? What are the actual percentages you refer to?
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
5,911
Location
Lenexa, KS
Any data out there of human impact on elk recruitment in Colorado? Curious to see if any studies have been done.

Yes there was a study done in the area around Vail. I bet if you Google Holy Cross you'll find it. There have been other threads on the study here, too.
 

SirChooCH

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
263
I recently listened to Steven Rinella be very pro-wolf in Colorado on the Tim Ferris Show. And that's one of the top business podcasts that reaches lots of people with money in their podcasts looking to donate to a cause...so its not looking good.

 
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
8,669
I recently listened to Steven Rinella be very pro-wolf in Colorado on the Tim Ferris Show. And that's one of the top business podcasts that reaches lots of people with money in their podcasts looking to donate to a cause...so its not looking good.


Well, that's intriguing. I'll have to check that out.
 

peterk123

WKR
Joined
Sep 7, 2020
Messages
458
Location
Montana
I think that if the wolf was originally in that habitat then it is okay for it to exist. However, I need to qualify that statement. Their habitat is not what it used to be and humans have made an enormous impact. Therefore we have a responsibility to aggressively manage the wolf population since it is the apex predator.

There is no doubt that apex predators have a place and a purpose, and can help balance the environment in which they live. But humans have done way too much to disrupt that balance so at this juncture we have an obligation to reasonably manage it. And here is where the problem lies. Hunting is really the only way to cull the herd. But the minute you try to hunt the wolves, the anti's either sue, or lobby hard to create legislation to stop it. Their lack of understanding, or maybe they just do not care, becomes a huge problem. As a result of their ignorance, they end up doing more harm than good.

So I now come full circle..... since humans cannot be trusted to do the right thing, maybe wolves should not be allowed. But that screws up the eco-system as well.
 

jolemons

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
1,013
Location
MT, USA
how do you explain entire herds that have been decimated? Maybe you’re right and they go after the sick first. Then what? What happens when they kill the sick animals? Do they stop? What are the actual percentages you refer to?
Having multiple apex predators, coupled with human take, will greatly reduce the population. It's a difficult situation, but for me personally, I would choose wildness over a manipulated environment where humans are the major predator. That isn't an easy conclusion for me to come to, and I realize that many are going to feel differently, and I sympathize with their view.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
Top