I dont understand the hostility towards wolf reintroduction in Colorado

OP
L

Loo.wii

WKR
Joined
Sep 23, 2022
Messages
662
You do realize that not all peer reviewed "scientific journals" are even all that scientific. Any time there is money or an agenda involved youre bound to wind up with bogus papers that were peer reviewed by other people seeking money or following an agenda. Plenty of examples of that out there as well if you just use your brain.
fair
 

DanimalW

WKR
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
395
Fair point. This is why I wanted to strike up this conversion. In my perspective pred populations should be managed. I think that this aspect (the management of predators) is the most important part of the discussion.
So you have a federal judge in California that makes decisions about wolf hunting and population control in Wisconsin now. Explain to me how that makes sense. Then explain to me why another state would want to reintroduce an animal knowing they will not have the sole right to manage the population.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
2,679
Location
Florida
In my mind it’s where they are being introduced. Colorado has some unique issues with its elk herd, they are more pressured than any other by:
1) absolutely the heaviest hunted
2) loss of winter ground/habitat fragmentation due to urbanization/population boom
3) recreational pressure, 24/7/365, unlike any other state

Add on to this the possible mountain lion ban, introducing wolves that will never be managed/hunted or if so, will be decades of battling in court, it’s just one more straw that’ll have a disproportionate effect due to the accumulation of all these other factors.

As a nonresident, selfishly, I see this as a reduction of opportunity. Opportunities are already being reduced across the board everywhere. I see this causing a cascading effect that will reduce opportunities in CO, displacing hunters to other states, causing more competition for already reduced tags else where.
Then there are the legitimate concerns of ranchers, how the entire introduction got implemented (ballot box biology and encouraging that precedent), and tax payer money funding it.
I actually like wolves, like seeing them, just wrong place, wrong time, wrong way going about it.
 
Last edited:

Mike 338

WKR
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
679
Location
Idaho
You do realize that not all peer reviewed "scientific journals" are even all that scientific. Any time there is money or an agenda involved youre bound to wind up with bogus papers that were peer reviewed by other people seeking money or following an agenda. Plenty of examples of that out there as well if you just use your brain.
Well said. A person doesn't need an "expert" to tell them which end is up. To be sure, many "qualified experts" are expert at maintaining or increasing their own position or financial security. Do your own thinking.
 

sveltri

WKR
Joined
Jun 22, 2016
Messages
913
Location
SALIDA
I don't think its a net negative to the ecosystem, the state, ranchers, or hunters. Now I understand that there may be an argument that broadly suggests that "they're the wrong wolves" but i am not educated enough on the ecology and the actual impact of different wolf sub species on wild life or the ecosystem.
Dawg i want peer reviewed scientific journals. Not some he said she said
You've asked for "scientific" proof of why they're bad, yet enter the conversation with emotion. Pony up DAWG, tell me why they're good!
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
1,025
Location
Colorado

It’s a federal crime to kill a wolf if it’s killing your dog.
 

yfarm

WKR
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
647
Location
Arroyo City, Tx
In 2022 Minnesota and Wisconsin released updated wolf plans, those links are easily searchable on this forum. Suggest reading those plans as the issues become readily apparent and are at root a rural vs urban conflict. If wolves aren’t in your backyard there is no problem. Reimbursement for livestock losses is discussed in the Minnesota plan, they honestly point out that payments are short term and the costs will eventually born entirely by the producers as the majority of the voting public live outside the range of the wolves and will not support an assistance program for the rural population.
 

Huntin_GI

WKR
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
379
Location
N. Colorado

The first few are free. You will have to login to read the others.

In summary, wolves destroy moose populations. Wolves hammer elk while pushing them off summer range and public winter range.

This doesn't address ranching concerns or ballot box management and the associated issues there.

Honestly, it feels like you are simply trolling.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Messages
1,090
@Loo.wii
Try making a livelihood on raising cattle in wolf country. Once you start losing calves(paychecks) to wolves you will think otherwise. Yes, there are reimbursements available to lost livestock if its "proven" they were indeed killed by wolves which is a crap shoot. If I lose 20 calves a year due to wolf predation, I may get reimbursed for 10 of them if I'm lucky and the price they give you per calf is not even remotely close to what they are worth.

Then the state will want to use non-lethal ways to protect your livestock.
They'll suggest you move your herd closer to home.
Then they'll suggest a guard dog.
Then they'll recommend wolf proof fencing
Then they may trap & relocate a few wolves to become another rancher's problem.
Then if none of this works, they will hire the USDA to trap & kill problem wolves which is only a temporary fix until the next pack moves in.

Now I fully understand that this livestock depredation will not happen immediately in Colorado but it's coming down the tracks like a freight train and it can't be stopped now.
 

kpk

WKR
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
771
Location
MN
Here in MN we have more wolves than all of the western states combined. Add northern WI and MI to that and then multiply the government numbers by 2, that'd probably be fairly accurate count here in the north.

CO will be much like MN with it's liberal policies. There will likely never be a season or a managed population. Northern MN deer and moose have been absolutely decimated by unchecked and unmanaged wolves. The same will happen in CO. Any attempt to manage the population will end up in the courts and will be decided by feelings rather than science and that's a serious problem to have.
 

Hnthrdr

WKR
Joined
Jan 29, 2022
Messages
3,483
Location
The West
Well Loo you kicked a hornets nest. For me as a Co native and someone who would like to wear the label “conservationist” the way this happened, the intent behind it and the blatant dishonesty is what gets me. 1. Wolves were naturally migrating down from Wyoming, there was zero need to spend massive amounts of tax payer dollars to re-introduce them. 2. The intent behind this initiative as stated in person by the governor’s husband (okay go ahead and say “hearsay”) is to replace human hunters with animal predators. 3. There will never be wolf hunting in Co, ever. They removed the 4th phase, management by hunting from the wolf plan.

As someone who believes in managing all species. This is a blatant attack on the North American wildlife model. Heck we regulate ourselves with tags, seasons, harvest limits, we regulate other apex predators in Co, lions and black bears. (Lions are currently on the ballot to be off limits though) who thinks it’s a good idea to introduce an unchecked apex predator and then not regulate them?! If my max works it won’t be for some years but at an average 5-8 pups a year Co will have hundreds and hundreds of wolves with no killing of said wolves. ( I know I know the 10j rule- look into it standard of proof is insane to be able for a rancher to protect his herd or flock) same with the reimbursement for slaughter standard of profit is wild, also anyone who ranches and has a decent sized ranch (my family does) it is sometimes impossible to figure out what killed your heifer, calf, steer, if you don’t find the animal the day it happens, we can talk about range riders, cowboys and the like, but folks like beef and they want it cheap. It is hard to run a ranch for profit in the first place, real cowboys are almost nonexistent and anyone who says just bring all the animals in at night are so far removed from ranching it’s hilarious 😂
 

mntnguide

WKR
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
464
Location
WY
The Teton Wilderness in Wy, USED to be one of the best habitats and moose populations in the state. Due to the wolf impact on the population, there has not been a single hunting tag offered in over 15 years now.

I guided years ago in the Frank church wilderness, about 10 years after wolves were introduced. It was common to go days without seeing a single ungulate, but hearing or seeing wolves daily. I'm not one to say wolves entirely destroy an ecosystem, but they sure as hell aren't helping any area they take a stronghold in.

Now I'm fully on board with re-introducing Grizzlies, and as a WY resident, i hearby offer up all of ours to be the transplants... this is a joke, i feel like i need to clarify this for some of you.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Messages
2,552
Location
Missouri
In the hunting perspective I also Don't think that reintroduction is negative. Multiple states have healthy wolf populations and still have healthy game populations. I imagine that a good wolf population would solve the issue of private land owners with massive swaths of land essentially having a monopoly on elk and deer in an area and capitalizing on it by charging ridiculous access fees. Broadly I think that predation by wolves on elk and deer will cause these animals to migrate in ways that are consistent with their historic patters of movement, effectively disbursing them in a way that is beneficial to your average public land hunter.
I think it's just as likely that wolf pressure will drive deerk/elk on to private land vs. driving them off. A lot has changed since wolves were last prevalent in Colorado. It's impossible to know with any certainty how putting wolves on a landscape now crisscrossed with highways and peppered with ever-growing urban/suburban areas will affect deer/elk movement. I think we can say with certainty that total deer/elk numbers will be lower with wolves than without, which is hard to spin as a positive for hunters, especially in a time when demand for tags is rising while supply is static or falling.

Another factor behind the hostility is the (accurate) perception that urbanites concentrated on the east side of Colorado forced these wolves on their rural neighbors on the west side of the state (the proposal specified that the reintroduction area would be west of the Continental Divide). The map below depicts the "beauty" of democracy in action, i.e., a narrow majority insulated from the consequences of its decision imposing its will on a substantial minority who will have to deal with the fallout.
6464bc8e12651.image.png
 

Maverick1

WKR
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,828
Here and on quite a few other public forums I've observed hostility towards the reintroduction of wolves in CO. Call me ignorant or dumb but I really dont understand the hate. I can understand the " THESE DENVER LIBTARDS WHO KNOW NOTHING GOT TO VOTE ON BLAHBLAH BLAH." perspective, but other than that I don't think its a net negative to the ecosystem, the state, ranchers, or hunters. Now I understand that there may be an argument that broadly suggests that "they're the wrong wolves" but i am not educated enough on the ecology and the actual impact of different wolf sub species on wild life or the ecosystem. If i am not mistaken, I think ranchers are reimbursed for livestock killed by wolves. If this is the case is there really a cost to the re introduction.
In the hunting perspective I also Don't think that reintroduction is negative. Multiple states have healthy wolf populations and still have healthy game populations. I imagine that a good wolf population would solve the issue of private land owners with massive swaths of land essentially having a monopoly on elk and deer in an area and capitalizing on it by charging ridiculous access fees. Broadly I think that predation by wolves on elk and deer will cause these animals to migrate in ways that are consistent with their historic patters of movement, effectively disbursing them in a way that is beneficial to your average public land hunter.

All that being said. While we are at it we should also reintroduce grizzlies to their historic range and buffalos too.

Im sure my opinion will get hated on but i hope this spurs a productive conversation that conveys nuances that I may not be aware of.


Edit.
Getting stabbed with a rusty blade by a gizz in the middle of the woods is better than getting mauled by a crack head in downtown Denver.
Here is some information from Idaho Fish and Game. It has statistics and numbers regarding the wolf impact on the elk population in one area of Idaho.
 
Top