BigHornRam
Well-known member
Watching tourists get mauled could be huge. How much would tickets to watch that go for?
Can we learn to live with wolves again?
- Thread starter Jasher
- Start date
Watching tourists get mauled could be huge. How much would tickets to watch that go for?
I'm signed for the required course and ready to play ball trapping. Next... Convince my wife the essential need for a sled to access the areas. Haha!!! Ya, she will hand me my snowshoes and say, "have at it".
Edit added: to Prariehunter's input, Colorado boasts a healthy "reality t.v." crowd. The next Don King, State run Pay Per View programming.
Last edited:
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I hear woofs really like to eat pot smoking liberals.
onpoint
Well-known member
My opinion - wolf reintro to CO is a stupid idea.
Some facts:
Wolves in appreciable numbers in the Arrowhead region of MN (a triangle formed by Lake Superior, Duluth, and a line northward from that city to the Canada border) were there long before Vkingsguy bought his land.
SW Mt, wolf reintro ground zero has had all kinds of cumulative effects affecting elk populations before, during, since reintro (Mid1990's)
A few:
Land use patterns changes (increased harboring and refugia, huge developments IE - Yellowstone Club, suburban sprawl - conversion of ag to residential, etc)
Increase in Grizzly Bear densities.
Increase in human population - including hunters, read increased pressure
Serious drought years.
Repeated extended late elk hunts, harvesting up to and over a couple thousand individuals annually
To name just a few issues which have the possibility to affect elk populations
And, Wolves.
An example of elk behavior pattern change:
Pre wolves arriving in the Gallatin Canyon, The YNP migratory bunch - which used to get the hell shot out of them during rifle season - quit hanging out in hunting district 310 (particularly Taylors Fork country) and began "blowing through" that country directly over to the Madison Valley - where refugia such as the Sun Ranch existed.
Once again, this long existing migration pattern was changing before wolves arrived on the scene.
I am no big fan of wolves, but a hell of a lot of other issues affecting elk populations in SW MT have taken place concurrent to reintro.
Fire away...................
Some facts:
Wolves in appreciable numbers in the Arrowhead region of MN (a triangle formed by Lake Superior, Duluth, and a line northward from that city to the Canada border) were there long before Vkingsguy bought his land.
SW Mt, wolf reintro ground zero has had all kinds of cumulative effects affecting elk populations before, during, since reintro (Mid1990's)
A few:
Land use patterns changes (increased harboring and refugia, huge developments IE - Yellowstone Club, suburban sprawl - conversion of ag to residential, etc)
Increase in Grizzly Bear densities.
Increase in human population - including hunters, read increased pressure
Serious drought years.
Repeated extended late elk hunts, harvesting up to and over a couple thousand individuals annually
To name just a few issues which have the possibility to affect elk populations
And, Wolves.
An example of elk behavior pattern change:
Pre wolves arriving in the Gallatin Canyon, The YNP migratory bunch - which used to get the hell shot out of them during rifle season - quit hanging out in hunting district 310 (particularly Taylors Fork country) and began "blowing through" that country directly over to the Madison Valley - where refugia such as the Sun Ranch existed.
Once again, this long existing migration pattern was changing before wolves arrived on the scene.
I am no big fan of wolves, but a hell of a lot of other issues affecting elk populations in SW MT have taken place concurrent to reintro.
Fire away...................
Last edited:
PrairieHunter
Well-known member
Maybe a little more than in Montana and Wyoming but not much. The real money would be in live streaming on social media.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
My real concern is over how many German Shepard will be blasted by the flatbrim Utah crowd once they hear there are wolves across the boarder.
BuzzH
Well-known member
We do have effective elk quotas in Wyoming and nobody loses their shit if they're over objective. Our legislature doesn't pass laws to keep elk at obscenely low objectives like Montana does either. That's also why Wyoming issued an additional 1030 elk tags, to give more hunters opportunity. If wolves were reducing herd numbers, our GF wouldn't issue 1030 more tags this year than last.
This will be the first, in the last several years, that I likely won't kill 3 elk in Wyoming.
If elk hunters in Wyoming are going hungry, its their own fault, not wolves.
Tradewind
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,151
shootbrownelk
Well-known member
I don't know Buzz, you're the expert. It seems to me that after the wolves were eliminated, there were scads of Bighorn sheep, Bison, Elk, Deer and Pronghorn. Many more it seems than when wolves were present. Where am I wrong in my way of thinking?
My thought on the story of them wanting to reintroduce wolves to Colorado didn't make any sense considering the elk herds are on a decline already. The cpw can't get the elk to stabilize now without wolves so how they are even considering it is beyond me. Outfitters are blaming it on hunters disrupting the rut but what I got from the article cpw said birthing numbers are fine it's the mortality rate of calves not making it a full year. So what is going on now for so many calves dieing? They say it's not predators. I'm not a biologist or anything close but I think the first thing that they should be looking at is nutrition. Cows have to get it in order to feed the calves while they are nursing then they have to get it on there own once they stop nursing. The parts of Colorado I have hunted are either dense forest or brown sun dried grass. I think this should be a lot higher on the list of things to worry about than reintroducing something that is just going to add to the problem. Wolves won't just be going after elk, the deer numbers in the state aren't all that great.
I now understand... Montana harvested in 2017, 255 wolves. This is close to the complete population of wolves in Wyoming, 355.
I'm not speaking of hunters failing in their hunt. I am speaking of low income people who could use the freezer elk meat versus wolves. Hunters willing to hunt for those less fortunate. I value this model, community support over gov't handouts.
Edit added: Another example regarding wolves and elk - Idaho F&G - Per the title of this thread, Learning "to live with wolves again":
https://idfg.idaho.gov/press/wolf-control-action-completed-lolo-elk-zone
Last edited:
shoots-straight
Well-known member
In 2016 61 wolves were removed in control actions . Don't forget to add this in. If you consider the fact that we had around 900 wolves and then killed over 300 of them that would mean a decrease of 30%. What other animal in Montana can sustain that type of harvest? I think we are somewhat effective in our population management of wolves.
Thanks for sharing. I had thought that was taken into account within the total annual wolf harvest report.
Interesting math:
Taking into account humans in MT took out 1/3 (roughly) of the wolf population and factor in the following...
An average 50% of wolves die within their first year from an average annual litter of 5... 2.5 wolves on average survive.
( https://www.wolf.org/wolf-info/basic-wolf-info/wolf-faqs/#k )
Territorial battles, disease, etc...
Average wolf lifespan: 2-3 years. Outside YNP ( https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/ys-24-1-yellowstone-wolf-facts.htm ) General grey wolf lifespan 5-6 years. ( https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Canis_lupus/#lifespan_longevity )
Last edited:
Irrelevant
Well-known member
HAHAHA you saw that too? What a joke.
BuzzH
Well-known member
I don't agree, not everything on planet earth has to be used, abused, and consumed by a human. Plus, you being the good conservative and all...not sure how giving elk to low income folk is anything but redistribution of wealth/socialism. You have a change of heart on one set of values, when its convenient to push an agenda of another?
I have a different idea, how about employers pay their employees a wage that affords them the basics of life, so that tax payers don't have to take up their (employers) slack via housing, food, and hunters giving them elk. Pay them a wage that allows them to hunt on their own, buy their own tags, and promote/contribute to a robust economy that also supports hunting, public lands, and our wildlife. Maybe that makes a little too much sense...and surely doesn't drive your recently discovered anti-wolf agenda.
As to the Idaho example, that's been explained in great detail on this board and others...way more to do with habitat changes than predators, and by a landslide. Google it.
Last edited:
Buzz, you have a need to go after the person. So be it. Keyboard away.
As for Idaho, you're contesting Idaho G&F not myself. I'm quoting directly from them and shared how they are learning, "to live with wolves again".
As for your assumption I'm opposed to employers providing fair pay, whatever the F that has to do with squat for this subject other that your further keyboard attack of the person versus the topic... Is beyond me. I support fair wages for employees. If that has any bearing.
Cheers though. Smile.
As for Idaho, you're contesting Idaho G&F not myself. I'm quoting directly from them and shared how they are learning, "to live with wolves again".
As for your assumption I'm opposed to employers providing fair pay, whatever the F that has to do with squat for this subject other that your further keyboard attack of the person versus the topic... Is beyond me. I support fair wages for employees. If that has any bearing.
Cheers though. Smile.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Sytes,
Read the article you referenced from the IDFG, the dots aren't hard to connect.
Then take a look at some other peer-reviewed science on the situation with the Lolo elk herd.
We live in the information age and some still refuse to accept that.
Carry on with the wolf wars.
Read the article you referenced from the IDFG, the dots aren't hard to connect.
Then take a look at some other peer-reviewed science on the situation with the Lolo elk herd.
We live in the information age and some still refuse to accept that.
Carry on with the wolf wars.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Maybe Buzz you can provide some links to the peer reviewed science you mention?
This link is not peer reviewed, but it connects the dots pretty well.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2018/mar/14/10-wolves-killed-in-northern-idaho-to-boost-elk-nu/
This link is not peer reviewed, but it connects the dots pretty well.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2018/mar/14/10-wolves-killed-in-northern-idaho-to-boost-elk-nu/
onpoint
Well-known member
"My focus lately with my free time, has been working with federal, state, and private Montana forest land owners to restore and maintain healthy forests in Montana. Also working to get quality Montana Forest Legacy projects funded. That is what I feel my time is best spent doing. Arguing about whether or not the Greenhorns should have a sheep hunting season or we should allow spear hunting, is not for me".
BHR
Must have inordinate amounts of spare time, or at least enough to keep commenting on issues not related to healthy forest management issues, BHR. Arguing about wolves would seem to be out of character for you. Carry on and on and on.
Off to my Sierra Club meeting.................................
BHR
Must have inordinate amounts of spare time, or at least enough to keep commenting on issues not related to healthy forest management issues, BHR. Arguing about wolves would seem to be out of character for you.
Carry on and on and on.Off to my Sierra Club meeting.................................
Last edited:
Similar threads
