Colorado wolves released today

[drdrop]

Out of curiosity, I looked up Idaho moose info. In 2010, there were 814 antlered tags and 197 antlerless tags.
In 2023, there were 514 antlered tags and 3 antlerless tags.

I would caution against assigning a single root cause to moose population decline. Speaking to researchers at UW they are also interested in other factors such as habitat, forage, disease, etc.

 

[Yoder]

It's a logical plan if you want to get rid of hunting.

 

[Shane]

Colorado (like most places) is being run by morons these days.

 

[drdrop]

While agree we should be more careful about what we post… hell I post things that are “edgy thought crimes” and here comes another one: our “sides” natural deference to science or reason or legal routes is exactly why we will continue to lose ground in this state, they are actively erasing our way of life and they love it, and most of us have “too much to lose” so we will roll over and show our bellies, and when it’s gone or a shadow of what it was, I guess we will go to wyo or mt and hope it isn’t gone there…

You make a great point that we need to be more forward on the science! The unfortunate reality was that prior to the CO vote, Rob Edward of the org leading the reintroduction ballot initiative openly admitted to misrepresenting science. Conservation orgs should have done a better job on calling them out for misrepresenting the science. Here's an excerpt from an excellent, balanced High Country News article that I wish every Colorado voter had read prior to the ballot:

Edward was eloquent but blunt, a middle-aged man who dressed in a way that suggested he was as comfortable in the rural parts of the state as in Boulder. His wife, Anne Edward, also a longtime wolf advocate, joined us; she was quieter, with gray hair and eyes that lit up whenever wolves were mentioned. They had chosen their language based on polling data, Rob Edward said. “They use that term — ‘restoring the balance of nature.’ Now, is it an oversimplification of a tremendously complicated system? Absolutely. Do I care? Not really.” At the same time, he said, the connection to research and its perceived authority was important. “The public as a whole places a tremendous amount of stock in scientists.”

Link to HCN article: https://www.hcn.org/issues/52.3/south-wolves-colorado-throws-wolves-to-the-vote

 

[awbowhunter]

Said it before and I'll say it again. Wolves will never be hunted in Colorado.

Sent from my moto g power 5G - 2023 using Tapatalk

You meant " legally hunted "
And i will refuse to EVER consider someone shooting a wolf poaching..JMO

 

[Customweld]

I would caution against assigning a single root cause to moose population decline. Speaking to researchers at UW they are also interested in other factors such as habitat, forage, disease, etc.

I don’t think wolves are 100 percent responsible. One thing to think about though. One unit in Idaho rose up from out of nowhere and started turning out 400 inch elk and became the go to for super moose hunts. You know what that unit doesn’t have an abundance of?

 

[Ranger 692]

I don’t think wolves are 100 percent responsible. One thing to think about though. One unit in Idaho rose up from out of nowhere and started turning out 400 inch elk and became the go to for super moose hunts. You know what that unit doesn’t have an abundance of?

Sounds like the same story of northern Minnesota vs Isle Royale moose populations right off shore in Lake Superior after the wolf introductions on the mainland(google it if unaware of what I’m referring to). But the academics always parse words, say it’s “nuanced and complex”, and blame climate change either directly or in academia code talk. When really the empirical evidence is plain to see. Not that it matters now this ship has sailed

 

[Dos Perros]

I can confirm his source.

What is it? I didn’t see.

 

[Dos Perros]

I would caution against assigning a single root cause to moose population decline. Speaking to researchers at UW they are also interested in other factors such as habitat, forage, disease, etc.

Ya because it’s a lot more interesting than “welp shit dang the wolves are just eating then shit outa them.”

 

[ReaptheHeat]

What is it? I didn’t see.

They did not release the location for "reasons". I live very, very, very close to the approximate release spot, pass by frequently, and seen others on social media posting the approximate location. The wolves might be running by my house tonight for all I know...

I'm pretty livid at this whole thing honestly. I thought about taking the thermal drone up this weekend but I bet they are long gone by then.

 

[def90]

I’m wondering if Polis drove or flew up there. Can’t see him spending several hours driving. If he flew, even more of waste in fuel and hypocrisy

It's only about a 2.5 hour drive from downtown Denver. I'm sure he was just along for the ride.

 

[Scottyboy]

I haven’t read all 10 pages, but all I want to say is good luck! (Coming from someone living in wolf country Minnesota..)

 

[sneaky]

What do you see in the final text of initiative 107 that states that? Seems like section (3)(a)(IV) establishes a means to delist. Now I'm not saying the goal posts won't move but I don't see anything supporting your statement?

Colorado Proposition 114, Gray Wolf Reintroduction Initiative (2020)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

They pulled the wool over everyone's eyes by not setting a number for the recovery goal. There could be 1000+ on the landscape in less than a decade, and people screaming to delist them, and they'll say "they haven't recovered to an acceptable level". When you try to pin them down on what that number is, you'll get nothing from them.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

A couple things; 1- We are not helping ourselves with the comments to hypothetically do illegal things. We will never win over the undecided unless we have some scientific and intelligent talking points that aren’t buried in nonsense.
2- The sexual orientation of the governor of Colorado has nothing to do with this. These comments will be deleted.
3- Too much of the above will get this thread shut down as we don’t need negative press from it.

To point #2. It absolutely does. His husband is anti- hunting, anti- meat, and anti- anything conservative. He's his main advisor. You have your head in the sand if you think it doesn't play a role. He's absolutely turning the screws on the rural conservative rednecks that he absolutely loathes. You'll NEVER be able to reason with the rewilders and preservationists. Ever.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

Dude, Idaho's population target for wolves is 500. We have 1500. The management of Idaho isn't doing a dang thing to manage them to a population target. Too many people think just hunting wolves manages them. It does not and that's the problem. You can not manage wolves without utilizing methods of lethality that folks these days can handle since we live in a soft culture now.

The actual agreed on number, by all parties involved, in Idaho is 150. That can be confirmed by looking at the original delisting documents and wolf plan in Idaho. 500 is just the number the state of idaho is targeting to have plenty of buffer room to the 150.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[fngTony]

To point #2. It absolutely does. His husband is anti- hunting, anti- meat, and anti- anything conservative. He's his main advisor. You have your head in the sand if you think it doesn't play a role. He's absolutely turning the screws on the rural conservative rednecks that he absolutely loathes. You'll NEVER be able to reason with the rewilders and preservationists. Ever.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

I’m aware, he could be getting the same influence regardless of that person’s sex or sexual orientation.

 

[oldskool67]

Progressives destroy everything

 

[sneaky]

I'm assuming a lot of decisions are being made based on studies such as this:

Wolves, Big Game, and Hunting – 8.001 - Extension

At a statewide level, wolves are unlikely to have a major impact on overall big game populations or hunting opportunities in Colorado

extension.colostate.edu

It states that in WY, ID, and MT where wolves are present - the elk population and hunter harvests have mainly increased.

I don't know what to make of this because everywhere I listen, and also the common sense meter tells me that both should decrease. How would the introduction of wolves NOT have an impact, I have no clue.

My point being is that it would be great to have some factual (not anecdotal) information to refute these studies. It's easy to have an emotional response but that won't get us very far unfortunately.

That's because elk populations in Idaho at least, have shifted to the urban/ag interface. They aren't killing more elk in the Frank, Selway, Clearwater, or Lolo as they were pre 95 wolf introduction.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[True North]

I wish I could say this is a good outcome, but I'm an elk hunter of the Yellowstone ecosystem and it is just sad what the wolves have done here. Good luck Colorado! What a voting shame.

 

[HONEYBADGER]

A couple things; 1- We are not helping ourselves with the comments to hypothetically do illegal things. We will never win over the undecided unless we have some scientific and intelligent talking points that aren’t buried in nonsense.
2- The sexual orientation of the governor of Colorado has nothing to do with this. These comments will be deleted.
3- Too much of the above will get this thread shut down as we don’t need negative press from it.

There are no undecideds. The lines have been drawn for several years now. This is just part of an all out war for our nation. There is no compromise with these people. They want you, your way of life, your values, and your family gone. Keep trying to play nice with them and that is exactly what will happen.