I dont understand the hostility towards wolf reintroduction in Colorado

[jtevanMT]

I was fortunate enough to draw one of the last late season bull elk tags issued north of Yellowstone in 2006. It was an amazing experience and I am sad that others will not have the same opportunity.

 

[MuleyFever]

Ten pages in less than 4 hours. Nice.

 

[GLB]

Without a plan to manage these introduced wolfs, it will become a big problem for game animals and livestock. There are states that are dealing with it now. Colorado will see that problem in just a few short years.

 

[Loo.wii]

Oregon has a minimum population of around 172 wolves

Fish and wildlife house to kill packs that target livestock every single year

If I remember correctly, all 10 of the worlds we were gracious enough to trap and relocate to Colorado. We’re all problem wolves that would’ve needed to be shot anyways.

sad but there is some comic relief to this

 

[Loo.wii]

Golfers don’t want more golfers

Snowboarders don’t want more snowboarders

Concert goers don’t want more concert goers

Surfers don’t want more surfers


Why can’t hunter not want more hunters?

Don’t tell me we need to grow our sport or it’ll get voted out…we’re a tiny fraction of the voting community and we can double or triple the outdoor community and it’ll have ZERO outcome at the ballot box.

fair point.

 

[IdahoBeav]

It's good to challenge and question your strongly-held positions and beliefs.

 

[Axlrod]

Back in the 90's in Montana and Idaho, we didn't get to vote on reintroduction. We had informational "meetings", with overwhelming negative response from citizens of those states. (the only people on earth this would have any effect on)
Well the Fed. gov. said F.U. and shoved them up our ass anyway- spending around $6 Million tax dollars initially.

We were told after "x" of packs the states could manage them. What they meant was you could manage them after you hire packs of lawyers and many years of costly litigation. These environmentalists game plan revolves around pro bono legal representation. They use it all over the west to run roughshod over anyone that uses public land for public use.

I feel sorry for Colorado hunters, but at least you got to vote on it.

 

[fwafwow]

Thanks to the OP for starting the thread. I started thinking it would just be an immediate dumpster fire*, but I'm learning (and wasting time on something other than scope and cartridge debates).

Isle Royale Winter Study: Good Year for Wolves, Tough One for Moose

The wolf population doubled to 28. The moose population declined 28%. More pups, increased predation and pesky parasites are among highlights of the 63rd annual Isle Royale Winter Study.

www.mtu.edu

Interesting articles on the moose population in Isle Royale. The first article estimates 8.7% (the second article says 10%) of the moose mortalities came from wolves, but later mention ticks as causing anemia, etc. and perhaps increasing some of those infected to predation. Does anyone know what is the expected or "normal" predation percentage?

https://idfg.idaho.gov/old-web/docs/wolves/articleHowling.pdf

Wow - much more detail on predation. One references 20% of cow elk deaths caused by wolves in Lolo. There is also some historic discussion of how black bears caused enough calf deaths to lead to a controlled "reduction" in black bears. Guess that tool isn't going to be available for wolves.

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1890/05-0032

https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2193/0091-7648%282005%2933%5B1245%3AGWEATG%5D2.0.CO%3B2

* - it hasn't happened so far - I'm replying before reading the entire thread.

 

[Svivian]

Dawg i want peer reviewed scientific journals. Not some he said she said

The Irony...

 

[Loo.wii]

OP. Wolves aren’t a hunters friend. They will kill the same things you want to hunt. Since there will be less animals to hunt, hunters won’t be able to hunt as much.

Obviously some states hunters can swap from hunting deer/elk to wolves instead. But wolves probably won’t ever be legal to hunt in Colorado. And wolves are harder to hunt than deer and elk. So most hunters aren’t going to take a week off work to go hunt something they have a very slim chance to be successful.

Ranching is a business. If something cuts into your profits you wouldn’t want that thing around your business. It happens all the time with government and voters though.




I’m curious about a few things in this thread.

When ranchers complain about deer and elk on their private land they get hunters saying it’s your fault. Let us hunt your land or put up with it. You shouldn’t be able to sell tags to help pay for the food that has been eaten and the fences torn down. Now that it’s wolves causing the rancher financial pains hunters don’t think ranchers are getting enough compensation.

How many open grazing leases are there on the public land where wolves roam? I’m assuming there are a lot going by this thread. If there aren’t a bunch why not?

How many ranchers have went out of business and had to sell because of wolves? I haven’t seen any info on that but I would assume a few in areas that wolves are the densest.


I believe there are some units that have been closed for over 10 years in ND. Last year they cut tags also in most of the open units if I remember correctly.

There are a few NE states with a plummeting moose population also.

Not saying wolves don’t hurt moose numbers. Its not just places with wolves where moose numbers are dropping though.



I personally would rather there not be many wolves on the landscape. I can understand from a non hunter non rancher perspective though how they aren’t the devil. Why would a non hunter care if it’s me killing the elk or a wolf? How would the non hunter understand ranchers aren’t getting full compensation for the wolf impact to their bottom line?

this is what ive been wanting. very developed discussion. im going to dig deeper into the moose question

 

[fwafwow]

Bravo. Worth the less than 2 minute watch.

 

[Loo.wii]

Bravo. Worth the less than 2 minute watch.

very well worth it

 

[Loo.wii]

Since you said you were from Florida, maybe you should take a look at the everglades as another example of how to f'up an ecosystem with the introduction of a non-native apex predator. People turned their pythons loose and look at what has happened there.

In the case of CO, the wolf is just a distraction. Look at the people involved in driving the bus and their motivations.

i understand that situation on the surface level. you dont need to be an expert in ecology to see florida, specifically south florida as a disaster. cool fishing though.

 

[Loo.wii]

Bravo. Worth the less than 2 minute watch.

side bar.... how does ones retina get detached and not notice it. i dont image its a peaceful process

 

[fwafwow]

bro I really just want to understand different perspectives. theres quite a few people where who I am certain the only thing we would agree on is hunting = good . I recognize that these people that I would otherwise not have the opportunity to interact with so i pose the question in good faith with sarcasm in a few of my comments.

I'm still not done with the thread (wow - it's moving quickly), but I suggest changing your tone. I doubt you would call strangers "dawg" and "bro" in person - especially when you raise a controversial topic in conversation. I think the tone and your admission that you are trolling isn't going to lead to the most fulsome discussion you claim to seek.

(No - I can't bring myself to ask you to cut back on the sarcasm. That would be a bit too hypocritical for me.)

 

[Bachto]

im going to dig deeper into the moose question

Are you actually going to? It feels like you are saying this to patronize us and look like you actually care.

 

[fwafwow]

side bar.... how does ones retina get detached and not notice it. i dont image its a peaceful process

Looks like my signature line count has been cut. Might be a sign from the mods. But to answer your question, it's not as obvious as you appear to think - hence the PSA.

 

[jtevanMT]

Bravo. Worth the less than 2 minute watch.

I have to disagree with this assessment and the content/message of the video. Peer reviewed science is the foundation for discovery and separates an opinion articles from hypothesis driven scientific discovery. Yes, scientific breakthroughs often come from the fringes of a field, but these are also peer-reviewed. Science, especially biological sciences, is constantly changing and adapting a new discoveries as publications are released. However, non-peer reviewed articles are opinion's offered by scientists should be taken with a grain of salt. Companies or special interest groups sometimes fund "research" and publish biased articles without peer-review. These are used by special interest groups to sway public opinion and are often times based on inaccurate scientific methods and heavily biased data that would not hold-up to the rigors of peer review. Peer-review is not perfect, and often times results in disagreements between the authors and reviewers that must be resolved or the article will be rejected from the journal. MANY manuscripts are rejected by top-tier journals. Some are later modified and published by lower tier journals. Thus, the quality and importance of the science is often reflected by the journal quality (impact factor score of the journal).

 

[woods89]

I hunt an area that will have wolves (occasionally it already does). I think they are cool animals, but the reintroduction is wrong place/wrong time.

You have to understand that there has been some real disingenousness around management in the WY/MT/ID wolves. Management has been delayed way longer than promised, and once management is allowed, really doesn't seem to have much effect.

This would be a much different conversation if we had a clear pattern on how they could be managed, and reason to trust that the goalposts wouldn't move when trigger numbers are hit. Unfortunately neither of those things exist, if the past is at all an example.

 

[Svivian]

I don't really like to participate in these types of threads unless it's to post memes, but this is a perfect example of why wolf introduction had no business being on a ballot for the general public to decide.

To expect the people of Colorado to make an actual informed decision on something like this is ridiculous and shows how poorly our state is being ran in regard to wildlife management.

A much better path would have been to manage the wolves that were already in Colorado that naturally migrated down instead of pretending they did not exist for years. I don't think many would have had too much of an issue if there was proper management.