Anyone want to talk some sense into this guy?

[browning2480]

Our forefathers were smarter than people today...the only good wolf is a dead wolf. JMO.

These smart forefathers you speak of also decimated all the other game animals. So I don’t think it was just the wolves that they had that thought process on.

 

[LanceS4803]

If the "pro wolf" groups were honest in their intentions, that would be one thing.
BUT, when target goal populations have hit 200% and 300% in some states/areas and the pro wolf groups still file legal actions on attempts to implement management, then they are not to be trusted.

 

[Ucsdryder]

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

The humans were already here and then they introduced wolves and then the herds got decimated. Yellowstone is a perfect example of this. It’s fairly easy to look at a state like montana or Wyoming and see the impact of wolves and herds before and after.

Were you able to get the percentages of weak/sick animals that the wolves take in the study your company did? And you didn’t answer the question, what happened once the weak and sick were killed off? Then what did the wolves eat?

 

[KHNC]

The humans were already here and then they introduced wolves and then the herds got decimated. Yellowstone is a perfect example of this. It’s fairly easy to look at a state like montana or Wyoming and see the impact of wolves and herds before and after.

Were you able to get the percentages of weak/sick animals that the wolves take in the study your company did? And you didn’t answer the question, what happened once the weak and sick were killed off? Then what did the wolves eat?

He probably wont get you those numbers, because they dont exist for real. Also, it seems clear he is not an elk hunter in a wolf populated state either.

 

[Where's Bruce?]

These smart forefathers you speak of also decimated all the other game animals. So I don’t think it was just the wolves that they had that thought process on.

Sustenance hunting during our nation's expansion took a big toll. No question. Fortunately they did learn and removal of wolves played a role in these facts:

In 1907, only 41,000 elk remained in North America. Today there are more than 1 million.

In 1900, only 500,000 whitetails remained. Today there are more than 32 million.

In 1900, only 100,000 wild turkeys remained. Today there are over 7 million.

In 1950, only 12,000 pronghorn remained. Today there are more than 1.1 million.

Do you think these species would have flourished if the wolves weren't nearly wiped out? (Rhetorical question-there is no argument)

 

[Ucsdryder]

He probably wont get you those numbers, because they dont exist for real. Also, it seems clear he is not an elk hunter in a wolf populated state either.

Why do you think I asked. Lol.

 

[Ucsdryder]

 

[KHNC]

Too bad the entire US cant vote against Colorado wolves. Even tho it will affect hunters from many NR states that visit to hunt. We fund the state primarily on hunting license sales. Probably more so that resident license fees.

 

[Ross]

Only good wolf for elk and deer hunters is a dead one....my pops crew took one out this weekend barreling in to a bugle looking for a meal and took a 7mm bullet instead...this will save many elk taking out a female...not tasty for them but satisfaction knowing they are helping to get a balance in a drainage that used to be trophy potential in an otc unit the fairy tale land of pursuing sick and weak is laughable if they run across it and feel like it they will kill it.....

 

[Gfmize]

Wolves don’t change rivers. The only thing they change is living elk into dead ones. They are useless, parasite ridden vermin. When they finish the elk, they start on the deer, moose, bears and finally your livestock and pets. Kill them all.

 

[RickH]

NYT best-selling author throws BIG money at Colorado wolf ballot proposal

Tim Ferriss offers $100,000 matching challenge in support of wolf reintroduction

www.gohunt.com

Tim Ferris has donated a lot of money to the pro wolf cause.
Wildlife management should never be decided by the mostly uneducated public. In my career as a fishing guide I got asked so many questions that shows the ignorance of a majority of the public when it comes to the ways of nature. "How many fish a day do beavers eat?". To have this majority deciding whether or not wolves should be introduced to a system is insane.

 

[jolemons]

The humans were already here and then they introduced wolves and then the herds got decimated. Yellowstone is a perfect example of this. It’s fairly easy to look at a state like montana or Wyoming and see the impact of wolves and herds before and after.

Were you able to get the percentages of weak/sick animals that the wolves take in the study your company did? And you didn’t answer the question, what happened once the weak and sick were killed off? Then what did the wolves eat?

It's around 50%, but I don't have the white paper in front of me. The study was done 10 years after they moved into the ranch that was studied. There will always be sick and injured animals available that would have otherwise died.


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[jolemons]

He probably wont get you those numbers, because they dont exist for real. Also, it seems clear he is not an elk hunter in a wolf populated state either.

I do hunt elk in wolf populated areas, as well as states without wolves. My career in land management has allowed me to also see hunting and wildlife data collected off of our private ranches in wolf and non-wolf populated areas. Wolves will decrease the prey population, probably to a more sustainable population density that would have historically existed. The wolves also need to be managed along with the prey species in order for balance to be maintained.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[The Ri Guy]

I'd love to agree with you guys saying all native species should be in their native ranges and managed -- but the problem is that western states are getting more liberal and they are not going to allow management of their beloved-Fluffy's "brothers and sisters". Give them an inch and they'll take a mile -- take WA for instance and look at CHOP/CHAZ if you want an example.

The uninformed REI warriors are going to protect them at all costs until the wolves are in Granola Joe's backyard munching on Fluffy's hind-quarter. I'd bet I'm more likely to see a wolf running through Pike Place Market attacking people before I'm ever allowed to hunt one in WA.

 

[Ucsdryder]

I'd love to agree with you guys saying all native species should be in their native ranges and managed -- but the problem is that western states are getting more liberal and they are not going to allow management of their beloved-Fluffy's "brothers and sisters". Give them an inch and they'll take a mile -- take WA for instance and look at CHOP/CHAZ if you want an example.

The uninformed REI warriors are going to protect them at all costs until the wolves are in Granola Joe's backyard munching on Fluffy's hind-quarter. I'd bet I'm more likely to see a wolf running through Pike Place Market attacking people before I'm ever allowed to hunt one in WA.

Agreed...

If you think wolves are a good idea and that soon we’ll have wolf management to control their numbers look no further than california and lions. No hunting, no management, voted on by the wildlife experts of San Francisco and Los Angeles. Hell, you can’t even get a depredation permit anymore.

 

[Where's Bruce?]

Common sense is sometimes spelled SSS.

 

[Ntuttle15]

I think when people talk about reintroduction of wolves they forget about human impact on the environment. Civilization has restricted natural range of animals which affects everything. Population, survivability, range, herd health etc.
Send us back 500 years and wolves have their place. Less people hunting so they can live. Now we have cities and town taking up enormous parts of landscape that would at one point in time be space available for game to go.
I find it very difficult to see how to balance a wolf population in our current state. I would hate to see their extinction, as I do think they still have a place. But it has to be carefully managed and who knows what the best answer to that question is.
They absolutely destroy fawn/calf population due to less range and total population. Look at Idaho Moose, numbers going down every year and wolves going up. Personally wolf sightings are happening more and more. And early spring wolf kills are everywhere. A 2 mile stretch of road I counted 8 elk kills.. so its a tough subject for sure

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

 

[BuckHunter24]

It's around 50%, but I don't have the white paper in front of me. The study was done 10 years after they moved into the ranch that was studied. There will always be sick and injured animals available that would have otherwise died.


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

They kill what the come across, sick or not. They have ruined many areas across Eastern Washington, Northern Idaho and Northwest Montana, that I've seen first hand. Colorado could learn from our mistakes instead of running into a buzzsaw on purpose.

 

[The Ri Guy]

San Francisco and Los Angeles

I looked into these wolf-advocacy groups a few months back and was shocked to see how many of the various organizations employees are from Tuscon, Arizona and Oakland, California. I find it interesting that these folks, living in big cities and states with little-to-no wolf populations, are the supposed "experts" on wolves, their impacts, and where/how they should be.

War over wolves: Opposing sides of wolf reintroduction argue their cases ahead of November ballot proposition

While other Routt County residents spent their stay-at-home days binge-watching Netflix shows or trying to bake Instagram-worthy loaves of bread amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Larry Desjardin developed an obsession with wolves. More specifically, Desjardin, a...

www.craigdailypress.com

This article is kind of interesting, with a statistical analysis showing that 100 wolves would require a 5% reduction in elk tags in CO to off-set wolf kills. So what happens when they get to 1,000 wolves like Idaho, a 50% reduction in tags? No more revenue from hunting because nobody wants to hunt surrounded by wolves?

Will be interesting to see how this plays out, I don't see us hunters winning this one in the long term unless ranchers organize and sue en masse, unfortunately.

 

[Mt_elk]

Saying they should be "managed" sounds nice but isn't it reasonable to assume getting a hunt established to do so would come after a decade or more of lawsuits and litigation from people who have never set for in the woods? How long would they go unmanaged because leaf lickers in Boulder think wolves are cool (no offense to hunters that live in Boulder, I live in Bozeman and we have our own problems with "woke" people). Snyder also mentioned on a podcast or two that Wilderness in Co is different than the Bob Marshal or the Metcalf, much smaller tracks of land and less places for elk to escape.