Colorado releases first 5 wolves

Wingshooter

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
120
Location
OH
I also like the idea of wolves if they're open to hunting once they have met certain criteria. I remember hunting caribou in Quebec and hearing wolves it's a cool sound at first light. I have a buddy that lives in Montana that just killed his second wolf with a Muzzleloader I am super jealous and he knows it. I would love to be able to kill one someday. Unfortunately it sounds like Colorado will never manage the pack they have unleashed always a mistake in my opinion.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2018
Messages
328
Location
Oregon
As a person who lives in and hunts an area that has a strong wolf population (saw them multiple times during elk season) I honestly don’t think the elk/deer population impact is as big as you think. I saw more elk this year then ever and that’s with wolves around. There are a lot more impactful predators out there. Us being one of them…. I believe there is a spot for all as long as they are managed accordingly. I don’t think it’s right to wipe them out. If you think that way, are you selfish or trying to justify your thoughts with elk/deer conservation? If your truly worried about #’s then we should probably do away with hunting as we are doing the same as wolves… I know this isn’t a popular opinion but I feel it needs to be said. As outdoorsman, hunters, conservationists etc we should want to restore the lands to its natural state.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2018
Messages
328
Location
Oregon
^^^ There's a difference when elk/deer are accustomed to wolves and when elk/deer arent.

Also, How are the moose in Oregon doing with wolves being there?
Ok, I will agree with that. But you have to start somewhere. Our wolf population hasnt always been strong. We used to never see/hear them. Now I can almost guarantee it. At one point we were a lot like Colorado.

Our moose, that’s a hard answer. I think there might be a 100 or so. Hard to know. Odfw has kinda given up managing them. But I don’t know if wolves are having monster impact on re establishing a healthy population or not. I talk to biologists but I am definitely not one. Some of the real truths are hard to find.
 

hjg_wy

FNG
Joined
Oct 30, 2023
Messages
17
A bit off topic… but moose are an odd one. The thought here in wyoming was that they didnt live here back in the day, believe it or not. What is clear is their population grew in the area until the 90s then started tanking. Probably a lot of causes together driving this, i dont know the latest thoughts. I think climate related stressors is supposed to be a big deal for em since they need it cool.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2023
Messages
4
I have seen the ecological studies done on Yellowstone that points to the positives of introduction, but Colorado is not Yellowstone. The amount of populations and private land in Colorado is huge. I also don’t think CPW takes us hunters seriously, not when there biggest resource to manage is people. It was a mistake to combine parks with game and fish. Everyone I talked to this year had a crap year for hunting and it’s a shame to think of how much money in travel and gear and money to a different county I alone put into it not to mention thousands of other hunters.

Seeing Polis happily release wolves in this hopes of a natural ecosystem is ridiculous. So many things would need to be done to go back to a Colorado pre-settlement that are impossible and not in the best interest of the population living here. Let wildfires burn up ski-towns, eliminate reservoirs of water storage, and even small things like stop pouring mag-chloride on roadways of highways and streets that drain into waterways. But these things have safety implications so we don’t. Wolves only receive the love because they are a charismatic macro vertebrate. The same level of care and passion and social media posting isn’t done for lesser species like the boreal toad or black footed feret. Its hard for people to understand that hunters our conservationist. We want to preserve what we have, but that challenge is increased constantly.

I think I would have been fine with wolves migrated into Colorado, with proper management, but I wish we’d stop trying to act like we understand all the implications and know what’s best for the ecosystem. I have an ecology degree from CSU where we were spoon fed climate change stuff, a lot of my friends turned against it. We were trying to understand the ecosystem and world on a mile high view. I always argue that I’m more concerned with localized change (reduce pollution, reuse, and be mindful of your impact) and witness had that change may impact outwards. Point is I wish we’d stop taking the broad approach to understand the ecosystem and I think this wolf reintroduction was done with that mindset.
 

Hnthrdr

WKR
Joined
Jan 29, 2022
Messages
3,466
Location
The West
I have seen the ecological studies done on Yellowstone that points to the positives of introduction, but Colorado is not Yellowstone. The amount of populations and private land in Colorado is huge. I also don’t think CPW takes us hunters seriously, not when there biggest resource to manage is people. It was a mistake to combine parks with game and fish. Everyone I talked to this year had a crap year for hunting and it’s a shame to think of how much money in travel and gear and money to a different county I alone put into it not to mention thousands of other hunters.

Seeing Polis happily release wolves in this hopes of a natural ecosystem is ridiculous. So many things would need to be done to go back to a Colorado pre-settlement that are impossible and not in the best interest of the population living here. Let wildfires burn up ski-towns, eliminate reservoirs of water storage, and even small things like stop pouring mag-chloride on roadways of highways and streets that drain into waterways. But these things have safety implications so we don’t. Wolves only receive the love because they are a charismatic macro vertebrate. The same level of care and passion and social media posting isn’t done for lesser species like the boreal toad or black footed feret. Its hard for people to understand that hunters our conservationist. We want to preserve what we have, but that challenge is increased constantly.

I think I would have been fine with wolves migrated into Colorado, with proper management, but I wish we’d stop trying to act like we understand all the implications and know what’s best for the ecosystem. I have an ecology degree from CSU where we were spoon fed climate change stuff, a lot of my friends turned against it. We were trying to understand the ecosystem and world on a mile high view. I always argue that I’m more concerned with localized change (reduce pollution, reuse, and be mindful of your impact) and witness had that change may impact outwards. Point is I wish we’d stop taking the broad approach to understand the ecosystem and I think this wolf reintroduction was done with that mindset.
Well put, also borreal toads are awesome still haven’t seen any above 8.5k ft but I’m always in the look out.
 
Last edited:

Andyram_18

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Sep 22, 2022
Messages
164
It’s hard to believe that in a time where we are trying to figure out already competing mule deer and elk populations, and no doubt that the wolves are going to increasingly make this thing more complex. Let alone, release the wolves and force CPW to try and clean up the mess. CWD, Wolves, Hunting Pressure, Drought, Killer winters…. We should be doing anything we can to make this better for Mule Deer and Elk. it sure is hard to look at this from an “abundance” mindset. Curious to see when the Wolves end up in Utah.
 

mt terry d

WKR
Shoot2HuntU
Joined
Jul 18, 2023
Messages
722
I have seen the ecological studies done on Yellowstone that points to the positives of introduction, ....
Don't put much ( better yet, any) faith in these "studies".

I know from 2 people directly who have been part of these"studies" (one in YNP, the other was MT fish and game -decades ago ) where the official conclusions were in complete contradiction to the actual study results. I have no reason to believe the conclusions fed to the public nowadays is any more unbiased or the conclusions less pre-determined.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2023
Messages
4
Don't put much ( better yet, any) faith in these "studies".

I know from 2 people directly who have been part of these"studies" (one in YNP, the other was MT fish and game -decades ago ) where the official conclusions were in complete contradiction to the actual study results. I have no reason to believe the conclusions fed to the public nowadays is any more unbiased or the conclusions less pre-determined.
That’s fair. I I know how it goes, most make a study to try and prove a point and when there point is disproven, “it seems this factor unfairly contributed to our results” or “further testing would need to be conducted, but we saw strong evidence that we were right”. I was just trying to convey that it would be impossible to use the studies from Yellowstone for Colorado. That seems to be where the talking points go. “No more overgrazing of riparian zones along streams, healthier ungulate populations, balance of predator prey” and yada yada.
 

drdrop

FNG
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
94
Location
Laramie
Don't put much ( better yet, any) faith in these "studies".

I know from 2 people directly who have been part of these"studies" (one in YNP, the other was MT fish and game -decades ago ) where the official conclusions were in complete contradiction to the actual study results. I have no reason to believe the conclusions fed to the public nowadays is any more unbiased or the conclusions less pre-determined.
Years ago I worked on a YNP Beaver-elk-willow dynamic study with CSU researchers. The key finding was that in small streams, the beaver won't come back unless the willow comes back, and the willow won't come back unless the beaver come back. This is because small streams incised so deeply over the decades in the absence of beaver & their dams that the groundwater table declined so much that willow roots can no longer reach it. This process got triggered by the explosion of the elk population overgrazing willow, which corresponded to no wolves and no hunting in YNP. Some researchers at Oregon State made some sweeping conclusions on how the YNP beavers would rebound following the reintroduction of wolves. While rebounding beaver may be possible for larger rivers, these CSU researchers demonstrated that there are exceptions for smaller streams. You can read all about it in this good article written for the general public audience here: https://www.hcn.org/issues/46.21/have-returning-wolves-really-saved-yellowstone

Ecology is the study of messy, complicated systems. There's nuance to every dataset and conclusion. For the average person hearing about scientific studies without getting into the details, of course skeptics will arise if a finding doesn't jive with their own mental model of how things work. Science follows a rigorous peer review process (at least in the respected journals, aka not some low-grade journal mill from China) and never claims to have all the answers. Generally we're talking a gradual improvement in understanding how things work. Science will always need the important job of journalists judiciously translating work and findings into something digestable for a broader audience.

What really grinds my gears is when folks use broad generalizations and claim to use scientific studies to back up their assertions. We see this on both sides of any argument, and misunderstandings can amplify in the age of social media. For example - watching this video one would conclude that beaver are restored in Yellowstone thanks to wolf reintroduction:
. These broad statements ignore the nuance of a system, and then you end up with an organization on one side of an issue oversimplifying things for their agenda. See: https://wolf.org/headlines/leave-it-to-beavers-not-if-youre-a-wolf/ They posted the following summary here, and one may presume the typical reader will connect the dots on this, thinking wolf reintroduction will change how stream flows.

"Beavers are influential. By cutting trees and damming streams, these rodents change the world around them, raising water levels and creating habitats for diverse plants, insects, fish and more. They are some of the world’s best-known ecosystem engineers, a term for species that produce outsize effects on their environments.

Wolves are powerful. As apex predators, their facility at killing reverberates down the food web, and their direct effect on prey species may affect vegetation, other animals and even how streams flow."


To reiterate, there is nuance to every issue. Be mindful of that, and be curious rather than interpret things as black or white. I am of the opinion that what's done is done, and now we need to start thinking about strategies to move forward. Reductionist thinking can make it tough for opposing views to move forward on anything.
 

Valkyrie

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 12, 2018
Messages
166
I don’t have any skin in this game as a PA East coast whitetail hunter but I can say that canines are hard on deer here. We have coyotes out the wazoo. Ten years ago they were unheard of in my area. Now my 135 acres is filthy with them. Deer are on edge and mostly nocturnal now. I have watched from my treestand multiple coyotes coordinate to ambush deer in my food plots. It’s an amazing sight but stinks also. They are brutal on fawns.

The eastern coyote shares up to 25% DNA with wolves and domestic dogs (same animals genetically btw). This allowed them to retain the most effective traits of both true coyotes and wolves. They have higher intelligence, hunt in packs, reproduction is a complex environmental response, more powerful bite force and larger bodies. My neighbor traps and he gets coyotes over 40lbs pretty regular.

While wolves are a gorgeous animal, I cannot imagine anything good for elk hunters coming from this. They will be hell on calves I’m sure.
 

Valkyrie

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 12, 2018
Messages
166
I would not discount this as an anti hunting attempt to reduce tags because of natural predation and a liberal front to reduce hunter numbers.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2023
Messages
4
My opinion is that there isn’t a greater conspiracy to reduce hunters, except by maybe some ultra left. I just believe no one cares about hunters and the booming economy that has been coming with it, (2000$ bows every year, more expensive clothing and gear, and increase in cost of tags). So many things add to the equation to make it appear like it’s being attacked. We used to duck hunt some local SWAs and year after year it seemed they were neglected and regulated more for everybody to use, if that makes sense. We would deal with people walking their golden doodle right behind our blind. Some SWAs were also encroached on by development. When I was younger, I spent the end of a season complaining because I wanted to access a piece of State trust land. Private property bounded one side and the only other access was a 7 mile hike. I’ve encountered that more and more over the years. CPW is just too busy managing people that the focus is never improving hunting. “It’s available to you, become a better hunter” seems to be the sentiment.

Here lately I get most of my enjoyment out of bird hunting. The rewards are lesser, but more plentiful.
 
Last edited:
Top