Interesting article on elk kill off near Vail

[JamesBrough]

We just need more wolves to help the herd, right?

Exactly

 

[Marble]

Really, so do you also want them to have a voice in management?

Management of the trail system maybe?

If they get charged money, get the time restricted or the areas restricted, they who'l have a voice. They should also pay up just like we do. We are harvesting a natural resource, they are using one, but all year round!

 

[Akwoodchuck]

Really, so do you also want them to have a voice in management?

Well. Might could be just a conceit of ours that we have so much more of a "voice" than other groups when it comes to management...we damn sure pay more in fees, taxes, etc....that should change.

 

[tdhanses]

Management of the trail system maybe?

If they get charged money, get the time restricted or the areas restricted, they who'l have a voice. They should also pay up just like we do. We are harvesting a natural resource, they are using one, but all year round!

Well don’t be shocked if they start to have more skin in the game that more areas become non hunting during certain seasons etc.

Be carful of what you ask as their are always unforeseen consequences.

 

[Beendare]

So the study showed that having 8 hikers go into areas while elk were calving had a HUGE effect on calf survival.

Now imagine what introducing wolves into that equation would do......

Just another unintended consequence that the wolf reintroduction folks ignore/downplay while pushing their agenda.

...

 

[cnelk]

Management of the trail system maybe?

If they get charged money, get the time restricted or the areas restricted, they who'l have a voice. They should also pay up just like we do. We are harvesting a natural resource, they are using one, but all year round!

We are harvesting a STATE resource on Federal land.

Remember when the DOW charged everyone for HABITAT Stamps?
Well they had to refund that money because they cant charge for Federal Land use, only State land use.

But I agree that something has to be done.
Trailheads are packed with NF users that dont pay a dime [other than their normal taxes]

I say all Subarus should have a NF excise tax

 

[BuzzH]

So the study showed that having 8 hikers go into areas while elk were calving had a HUGE effect on calf survival.

Now imagine what introducing wolves into that equation would do......

Just another unintended consequence that the wolf reintroduction folks ignore/downplay while pushing their agenda.

...

Pushing an agenda?

Have your read your own posts lately?

 

[Marble]

It seems that there is probably more of an impact on much more than elk from the abandance of people that go hiking for the sake of hiking in the woods. We dont get charged to go into the woods, we do get charged for wanting to kill something in the woods though. So, if we as a conservation group, start pushing for limited access in general, along with charging some type of access fee, would we them be subject to same rules? Maybe our hunting license/tag etc covers it and gives automatic access?

 

[CX5Ranch]

Me and a buddy have been planning a backpacking trip for a long time. We are planning on heading out in 2025. We are definitely not afraid of steep country we deer hunt all the time in Illinois. I'm not looking for a honey hole but if anyone knows a good trail to see some cows having calves in unit 45 Colorado PM me

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[trophyhill]

Can't remember the unit # but I hunted above Breckenridge near Borias Pass a few years back. I could not believe the amount of hikers, bikers and treehuggers I saw. Made me not want to go back. And I haven't.....

 

[BuckSmasher]

I'm calling BS on this. The research design model is awful. What was the control? They still don't know what the mechanism for the calf mortality is. I would trace calf mortality to predators, probably black bears. Abolition of bear hunting with hounds and over bait as well as spring bear hunting is huge.

This is just speculation of course, which is exactly what that article is. Policy shouldn't be made off of speculation.

 

[Newtosavage]

Here here! If it doesn't heel it is a nuisance. Hate untrained dogs.

Oh, but as long as they have a red bandana around their neck, they are fine! LOL

 

[Jqualls]

I say to combat the issue we start with a multi pronged approach

1. Excise taxes on all hiking and backpacking equipment that flows directly into a fund similar to the pitman Robinson fund to support habitat.

2. A restrictive backpacking season. Extremely limiting trails to be used during the spring and summer.

3. A backpacking license, and of course for non residents that license will cost 10x what the resident pays.

4. Possibilty of a draw system, with preference point (for sale of course) to allow limited access to trails during those amazing wildlife times. There can still be come OTC hiking units but we will assess their crowding and impact at a later date!

I believe this is a solid formula to limit access and pressure, while also giving the people opportunity!



(Yes that is all sarcasm font! But it would be amazing if they would do some of those things and make the hikers and bikers actually respect wildlife and pay a share of management)

We don't pay to use the land we pay to consume a resource. Similar as someone who cuts firewood in the national forest and also has to pay for it. If there are fees to access the land (which completely defeats the idea of public lands) it will just be added on top of our tag fees.

In the area of Colorado I live in a lot of trails and recreation areas are closed for use during certain times of years for the wildlife. Closures are mainly during the winter and early spring.

I sure hope we never have a draw system to use public lands but there is a similar system set up for a lot of the rivers in the west so maybe it is not that much of a stretch.

I know this was written in sarcasm but in reality we have already implemented some of these steps. Every group thinks the other does not respect the wildlife/land in reality most of them do and most also contribute to management. Bikers complain that they are the only ones managing trails and the strings of pack horses destroy the trails and leave huge impacts with their camps (which some of them do). Hikers complain about bikers, hunters complain about everyone it is just a cycle of who thinks they have some sort of entitlement to the lands.

I personally see the biggest impact from the hunters. Not most hunters but a few make the rest of us look really bad. If I drive up some of the popular hunting camp roads I will find a couple camps that leave the site completely trashed. It is amazing the XXit people think is ok to leave behind or thinks somebody else should clean up.

 

[juan trueno]

If I’m not allowed to hike with my dog anymo I’ll have to hire up a dog walker to take him hiking. WTF. I don’t hunt Colorado but indefitnely let my dog run loose in calving grounds while I hike and fish. He usually kicks up a few which I consider “scouting” I don’t see the big deal. I don’t let him eat them for Christ sake- in fact tha twould be counter productive because usually I’m trying to sell the grid coordinate to where we flush them to guys who don’t want a honey hole but do want a hand out

 

[Okhotnik]

Driving up I 70 from Denver is really depressing. The amount of development is becoming out of control. Knowing what to do about it is the real challenge.

They already know how to solve this

Drastically reduce the amount of tags like they have in Washington and Oregon.

Put wolve sinto the mix combined with the good intentioned but ignorant anti hunting tree NAZi's and you can end hunting

Google Pitman Robertson Act to see the 100's of millions of dollars hunters have contributed to wildlife habitat and restoration. Compare tat to casual recreational users like hikers(zero) who love to bash hunters

 

[alpinewanderer]

Sorry for the long post here but this topic is too interesting not to spray my thoughts. So we have major public lands user group that doesn't have a direct financial or dietary interest in the well-being of wildlife: a curious problem indeed!

I always enjoy presenting the counter-intuitive idea to non-hunting acquaintances that people who kill a limited number of wild animals (i.e. hunters) under state oversight are actually doing more to protect and grow wildlife (in most cases) than those who do not consume them. After all, who would be more sensitive to population changes than those who depend on them for food?

Much like these non-hunting acquaintances, I have a lot of friends who only use our wild lands for outdoor sports like trail-running, rock climbing, mountain-biking, skiing, etc. and I must admit most are woefully uninformed and, to be honest, uninterested in wildlife issues. It seems that to them wildlife are mostly an aesthetic feature of the landscape like a lake, sweeping snowy ridge-line, or meadow of alpine flowers. They never give them much direct attention and they don't really know how they work but tell them someone is trying to kill, destroy, or defile them and holy crap they are up in arms!

How can we get these land users to care in a way that is a little less superficial?
1. I think that bringing recreational outdoor equipment brands into the Pittman-Robertson fold would be a start.
2. Turning these people into hunters would probably help as well.
3. I think that the sheer number of off-leash dogs that I see across Colorado can't be helping wildlife in any way. Colorado needs to enforce leash laws and fine violators vigorously. There should be a hotline I can call to report people and officers should be posted for this sole purpose in high-use areas during peak-season and calving times.

Interestingly enough I can't help but wonder if the return of wolves to Colorado could actually end up helping elk and us elk hunters. Wolves hate dogs even more than I do (sorry but I have to be honest) and will kill off-leash pets if they get the chance. Couple of photos of a wolf-killed Fido carcass on a trail-head warning sign ought to help. We could consider the wolves to be a brutal second line of leash-law enforcement. Yeah the wolves will eat some elk but being the charismatic creatures that they are we could probably use them as a ploy to get non-consumptive users to respect seasonal trail closures and major conservation land acquisitions because lets face it, it would be a lot easier to sell "save the wolves" to a big city bro than "save the elk". Once the wolf population is healthy and stable, Colorado can add them to the list of hunt-able species as Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming have.

 

[BuckSmasher]

Sorry for the long post here but this topic is too interesting not to spray my thoughts. So we have major public lands user group that doesn't have a direct financial or dietary interest in the well-being of wildlife: a curious problem indeed!

I always enjoy presenting the counter-intuitive idea to non-hunting acquaintances that people who kill a limited number of wild animals (i.e. hunters) under state oversight are actually doing more to protect and grow wildlife (in most cases) than those who do not consume them. After all, who would be more sensitive to population changes than those who depend on them for food?

Much like these non-hunting acquaintances, I have a lot of friends who only use our wild lands for outdoor sports like trail-running, rock climbing, mountain-biking, skiing, etc. and I must admit most are woefully uninformed and, to be honest, uninterested in wildlife issues. It seems that to them wildlife are mostly an aesthetic feature of the landscape like a lake, sweeping snowy ridge-line, or meadow of alpine flowers. They never give them much direct attention and they don't really know how they work but tell them someone is trying to kill, destroy, or defile them and holy crap they are up in arms!

How can we get these land users to care in a way that is a little less superficial?
1. I think that bringing recreational outdoor equipment brands into the Pittman-Robertson fold would be a start.
2. Turning these people into hunters would probably help as well.
3. I think that the sheer number of off-leash dogs that I see across Colorado can't be helping wildlife in any way. Colorado needs to enforce leash laws and fine violators vigorously. There should be a hotline I can call to report people and officers should be posted for this sole purpose in high-use areas during peak-season and calving times.

Interestingly enough I can't help but wonder if the return of wolves to Colorado could actually end up helping elk and us elk hunters. Wolves hate dogs even more than I do (sorry but I have to be honest) and will kill off-leash pets if they get the chance. Couple of photos of a wolf-killed Fido carcass on a trail-head warning sign ought to help. We could consider the wolves to be a brutal second line of leash-law enforcement. Yeah the wolves will eat some elk but being the charismatic creatures that they are we could probably use them as a ploy to get non-consumptive users to respect seasonal trail closures and major conservation land acquisitions because lets face it, it would be a lot easier to sell "save the wolves" to a big city bro than "save the elk". Once the wolf population is healthy and stable, Colorado can add them to the list of hunt-able species as Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming have.

I think there are a lot of problems with this. First, I think you are placing a heavy emphasis on off leash dogs harming elk calves. I would be shocked if that is a significant factor. Second, you are amazingly and in my opinion grossly over optimistic about the prospects for wolf management in Colorado. I have been called a pinko-liberal commie anti hunter (none of which I am) for arguing that wolves shouldn't be eradicated from the greater yellowstone ecosystem (GYE). I was enthralled with the idea of restoring them back in '95 when I was in grade school, and loved studying about the success of the reintroduction when I was getting my Biology degree during the early 2000's. BUT. And this is huge. The radicalization and overt misrepresentation rampant in the anti-hunter, anti-delisting crowd turned even my pro-wolf reintroduction stomach. I hoped that we could reintroduce wolves, keep them at biologically viable population sizes and manage them. For the record, I think the states are doing that sensibly now but the battle to get there was INTENSE. Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming are WAY WAY WAY more ameniable politically to wolf management than Colorado. Colorado is California in the Rockies. I think wolves in Colorado would be a nightmare. Not a nightmare if they could be managed the way you say, I am not afraid of them like the wolf eradication crowd, I firmly believe they would be a nightmare because of the complete disconnection that Colorado voters have with reality. Why did Colorado get rid of spring, hound, and baiting for bears? Is killing a bear over bait inhumane if you have an adequate weapon? Of course not. Is killing and hunting them in the spring, which could harass them enough to help with elk calf depredation inhumane? Of course not.