elkhunter505
WKR
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2018
- Messages
- 449
Hey everyone, really wanted to bring this up partially to have a discussion surrounding this and see what everyone's opinions are on this and to applaud @Howl For Wildlife for standing up and saying the things that I feel need to truly be said within the hunting space. For context, I recently read this article from howl (https://www.howlforwildlife.org/words_wolves_and_the_war_on_hunting) and really appreciated the viewpoint that they brought to the table surrounding the perception of hunters when it comes to predator hunting. Another point for context is the wolf bill that is currently within the MT state legislature attempting to lower the number of wolves on the landscape. After reading into this bill and thinking about it in depth, I truly believe that those bills are not grounded in scientific evidence and are being pushed by hunters, ranchers, and outfitters alike. To be transparent, I don't blame hunters, ranchers, or outfitters for wanting to see less predation on their animals, but I don't believe that a legislative bill that is not grounded in science is a valid way to manage our wildlife.
That being said, I want to have a true discussion that allows me to see why some people are so adamant about opposing the CO ballot initiatives (which I directly oppose and condemn to anyone that will listen) on the basis that they're not grounded in scientific management but are willing to support a legislative bill that is also not grounded in science. So for those of you that would like to discuss this, how do you see these things as differing if you support the wolf control bill, but not the wolf introduction ballot initiative?
To start us off, my opinion is that legislative bills that are not being supported in some way by state wildlife agencies are not grounded in scientific wildlife management. I adamantly opposed the introduction of wolves to CO; however, I was not a voter in the state. In my opinion, wolves were already in CO and were already finding their way to CO and the reintroduction was a massive waste of tax payer money that added "bad" wolves onto the landscape. The wolves that were finding their way to CO were the wolves that ranchers would be more okay with as those wolves had learned to avoid humans, cattle, and other places that get them in trouble. Dropping wolves onto a landscape where they need to actively learn what to avoid without having the ability to do so is doing a disservice to both the ranching community and the wolves that were used in those translocations. Similarly, I believe the legislative bills in the MT state legislature are also not grounded in scientific management. If FWP had determined that more management on wolves was needed, those things would have been recommended and implemented through the game commission as I believe there are very few hunters, ranchers, and people that show up to commission meetings that would be opposed to that. Given this, I am seeing lots of folks who adamantly opposed the CO ballot initiatives on the basis that they were not grounded in scientific management being supportive of this type of legislative action which I find to also not be grounded in science. I find this type of behavior highly hypocritical and am curious to see how others are thinking about this issue. Hopefully this can stay as a logical thread and not devolve into a mess, but we'll see what happens. I appreciate anyone willing to articulate why they may support one bill but not the other especially if you are in the same camp as I about the CO wolf reintroductions not being scientific wildlife management.
That being said, I want to have a true discussion that allows me to see why some people are so adamant about opposing the CO ballot initiatives (which I directly oppose and condemn to anyone that will listen) on the basis that they're not grounded in scientific management but are willing to support a legislative bill that is also not grounded in science. So for those of you that would like to discuss this, how do you see these things as differing if you support the wolf control bill, but not the wolf introduction ballot initiative?
To start us off, my opinion is that legislative bills that are not being supported in some way by state wildlife agencies are not grounded in scientific wildlife management. I adamantly opposed the introduction of wolves to CO; however, I was not a voter in the state. In my opinion, wolves were already in CO and were already finding their way to CO and the reintroduction was a massive waste of tax payer money that added "bad" wolves onto the landscape. The wolves that were finding their way to CO were the wolves that ranchers would be more okay with as those wolves had learned to avoid humans, cattle, and other places that get them in trouble. Dropping wolves onto a landscape where they need to actively learn what to avoid without having the ability to do so is doing a disservice to both the ranching community and the wolves that were used in those translocations. Similarly, I believe the legislative bills in the MT state legislature are also not grounded in scientific management. If FWP had determined that more management on wolves was needed, those things would have been recommended and implemented through the game commission as I believe there are very few hunters, ranchers, and people that show up to commission meetings that would be opposed to that. Given this, I am seeing lots of folks who adamantly opposed the CO ballot initiatives on the basis that they were not grounded in scientific management being supportive of this type of legislative action which I find to also not be grounded in science. I find this type of behavior highly hypocritical and am curious to see how others are thinking about this issue. Hopefully this can stay as a logical thread and not devolve into a mess, but we'll see what happens. I appreciate anyone willing to articulate why they may support one bill but not the other especially if you are in the same camp as I about the CO wolf reintroductions not being scientific wildlife management.
