Predator reintroduction anti-huntung

[Joemich1911]

As someone who lives in Indiana I feel like someone from the outside looking in. From my outside view it seems as though all of these reintroduction of predator species could be seen as anti hunting. In the sense that our major argument for hunting is the conservation it provides for the species we hunt. And all these efforts to bring "natural balance" back to wilderness areas woukd be to say we no longer need the hunter to manage these species. It's hard for me to grasp the vastness of western states compared to my own, so excuse my ignorance. It seems that confirmation biases are rampant with this issue when you go looking for statistics. If you're pro reintroduction you find gobs of information telling you how much the landscape has improved or how beavers are now in areas they never were. And if you have an anti reintroduction perspective then you are inundated with statistics regarding herd movements and lower ungulate populations in certain areas. So I ask you, who live in these areas what the real impact is as you see it. Thanks from Indiana

 

[Customweld]

This is my anecdotal experience in Idaho.
Wolves were reintroduced in the mid nineties. It took about 4 years for them to impact where I hunted at the time, which would have been unit 26 in Central Idaho. They moved out of Central Idahoans started showing up in the other units around 2002. Elk behavior changed. They were more quiet and congregated in smaller groups (6-8) instead of 15-30. I haven’t noticed any substantial differences in habitat, no miraculous wetland recovery or forest regeneration. Elk numbers dipped in the central part of the state and exploded in areas where they historically had never been, which happens to be in the urban interface and ag ground. This costs Idaho sportsmen a ton of money in depredation reimbursement for crop, fence and hay damage.
Idaho hit the agreed upon wolf population somewhere around 1998-1999. With the first hunt held in 2011.
The animal groups do not stick to their word and do not operate on a level field. They file lawsuits relentlessly and continuously move the goalposts.

 

[Fetty Wapiti]

The people in charge and voters supporting these measures don't think that far in advance, it is simply a conspiracy theory. Possible outcome, yes, but they are not smart enough to weaponize wildlife management for their own gain. They just watched too many Disney movies.

 

[Customweld]

The people in charge and voters supporting these measures don't think that far in advance, it is simply a conspiracy theory. Possible outcome, yes, but they are not smart enough to weaponize wildlife management for their own gain. They just watched too many Disney movies.

The folks voting for it may not be, but the groups pushing them damn sure are. Don’t underestimate them.

 

[roadrunner]

If humans are replaced as the apex predator, humans no longer need a firearm.

That's how their logic works.

 

[Koda_]

As someone who lives in Indiana I feel like someone from the outside looking in. From my outside view it seems as though all of these reintroduction of predator species could be seen as anti hunting. In the sense that our major argument for hunting is the conservation it provides for the species we hunt. And all these efforts to bring "natural balance" back to wilderness areas woukd be to say we no longer need the hunter to manage these species. It's hard for me to grasp the vastness of western states compared to my own, so excuse my ignorance.

If there was a true natural balance there would still be plenty of game for hunting. Your perspective from Indiana is actually more insightful than you may realize... even in the vast expanses of the American west, habitat has been permanently fragmented for the very large migration patters that western mule deer and elk used to have to naturally balance their populations with natural predators like wolves.

 

[Pony Soldier]

The normal cycle is way to many followed by barely any over X number of years. Game management was designed to chop the top and bottom off of that cycle.

To achieve that the predator numbers have to be trimmed to match the cycle. Still waiting to see that.

 

[Magma]

The people in charge and voters supporting these measures don't think that far in advance, it is simply a conspiracy theory. Possible outcome, yes, but they are not smart enough to weaponize wildlife management for their own gain. They just watched too many Disney movies.

You said it all, their actions are based on emotions and not facts or science.

 

[Jimmy]

The people that want to bring back dangerous predators on the landscape are not the people who will have to deal with them in day to day life. (99.99% of the time)

Here in CA some idiots want to bring back grizzly bears. They are not aware that the Grizzlies traditional habitat was in the valley and along the coast. The places now filled with cities and highways. Not the sierras.

 

[N.ID7803]

These three graphics paint a pretty good picture.

"The fact is, we are currently at more than 3 times the number US Fish and Wildlife Services stated as management objective, and more than double what the Service suggests being “Above long-term carrying capacity” for the NRM DPS."

 

[Ross]

I always laugh when I see posts of this nature. It is common sense, add a large pack predator and one who produces large litters. They do not eat grass, their prey generates 1-2 offspring a year. You don‘t allow any hunting of them for a decade If ever. I was not a great student but good in math. The charts above give you a very good study of what wolves will do in Colorado soon. 10 wolves one year, next year 20. Next year 40, then 80, 160, 320, 640. Yikes why are there now less deer and elk First hand impact it sucks and it makes you mad every time you find one of these. They have no limit on tags and chase them 365 24 hrs a day see the one chasing this group. They don’t succeed every time but do it enough and they win sadly.

 

[Pony Soldier]

They tend to kill all the babies and then start picking off the old ones until with no reproduction and a declining population soon there is nothing left and eventualy when they exhaust the food supply (including domestic stock) then their numbers will start to decline. Hence an extended period of predators with very limited prey species. Not a bright future.

 

[wind gypsy]

As someone who lives in Indiana I feel like someone from the outside looking in. From my outside view it seems as though all of these reintroduction of predator species could be seen as anti hunting. In the sense that our major argument for hunting is the conservation it provides for the species we hunt. And all these efforts to bring "natural balance" back to wilderness areas woukd be to say we no longer need the hunter to manage these species. It's hard for me to grasp the vastness of western states compared to my own, so excuse my ignorance. It seems that confirmation biases are rampant with this issue when you go looking for statistics. If you're pro reintroduction you find gobs of information telling you how much the landscape has improved or how beavers are now in areas they never were. And if you have an anti reintroduction perspective then you are inundated with statistics regarding herd movements and lower ungulate populations in certain areas. So I ask you, who live in these areas what the real impact is as you see it. Thanks from Indiana

Do you really find gobs of such information or is it just the same debunked "how wolves change rivers" fairy tale being rehashed by the 43rd person in the game of telephone acting like it's fact? Is actual data out there?

 

[Huckleberry Hound]

Do you really find gobs of such information or is it just the same debunked "how wolves change rivers" fairy tale being rehashed by the 43rd person in the game of telephone acting like it's fact? Is actual data out there?

He specifically mentions beavers returning. Thats a common point made. The yellowstone "trophic cascades" advocates always talk about how the beavers returned, due to wolves. But they always leave out the fact that somethibg like 140 beavers were trapped elsewhere and released into the yellowstone ecosystem after the wolf release. Beavers didnt come back on their own because of wolves, they were relocated there by man.

 

[Hnthrdr]

The “re wild movement” is silly, western landscapes have been so radically changed since even the 1800-1900’s that it would be impossible to “re-wild” also humans have been hunting animals on the North American continent for thousands of years, so I would argue we are human, and we are a predator. It is less natural to remove us from the food chain than to insert an abundance of unregulated animal predators to some how create natural balance. Those animals know one thing, they will kill and eat whatever is in their path, even if it means they eat themselves out of house and home. Then they will try to find new prey or they will die.