I'd have no problem with that. We've got plenty of predators even closer. Lions are routinely spotted here on security cams. One even took down a deer near a suburban intersection in Southeast Boise.
Wolves, lions, and grizz are thriving in the GYE. Is that not conservation/preservation enough? Maybe you should ping some ranchers in CO, WY, or MT, about how predators impact their livelihood and how much "assistance" they get for their losses from the government.
I’ll give you credit for being consistent, but I’ll disagree on how we view them. I don’t view them the same way as wolves or mountain lions.
Few, if anybody, on this site will argue that having wolves, grizz, and lions in the GYE is a bad thing. It's a win for conservation that this huge park is able to support thriving populations. However, when they predictably expand beyond the confines of the park, conservation shouldn't stop. Like all other game species, populations should be audited and effective management goals established including hunting seasons. However, this will never happen in our lifetimes on grizz and it's touch and go with wolves every year.
You and your rancher friends live in the middle of the predator zone. It really sucks to be them and receive, from what I've generally heard, only a fraction of the amount of money they should receive for losses due to predation. If they're receiving "fair" compensation for their losses, I think we'd all be hearing about it.
That explains things.
Part of the problem, in my view, is that we're being gaslighted by various groups that conduct census counts of grizzlies. Either the grizzlies in Idaho are particularly violent, or there are lots more of them than we've been told. I'd like to see an unbiased comprehensive census taken by Idaho Fish and Game - fund it with a legislative budget line item. It's difficult to make an informed decision if objectively-acquired data are lacking.
I am pro rancher, but that one gets old. The government helps them as much as they help my business. But i don't go crying about my increased overhead. Heck one rancher i am friends with complains the elk are eating all there feed.
Agree 100% on the need for data and that isn’t limited to predators. The wildlife agencies have a hard enough time surveying deer and elk in wilderness areas like the Bob and Frank Church. These are animals that spend quite a bit of time in the open compared to bears. Prioritizing funds for an in-depth census for grizz may be even more challenging and heavily influenced by “estimates”. I understand you gotta start somewhere….
In the case of wolves in CO, the government agencies introduced a problem where none existed. Then they tied ranchers’ hands with only non-lethal means to control problem wolves with no chance of a hunting season or other reasonable management controls in place. Then they implemented a $15k cap on restitution for predation. With calves going for around $1000, it wouldn’t take long to hit the cap and then what?
To be fair, elk don't eat couches.
They stopped allowing hunters on the ranch after one decided to shoot at turkeys in the corral where steers where.
That’s really unfortunate, but it seems they threw the baby out with the bath water. A lot of people would pay a reasonable trespass fee to help eliminate cows (elk).
Overpopulation is a good point.
no they don't, but to be fair, i have had a fair amount of added overhead due to governmental regulations.
We also nearly market hunted some game animals out of existence. That doesn’t make it a good idea.
