The "Low Impact" Impact 🤔

[Sytes]

Taking into account the various pack strings that worm away at erosion to a level beyond acceptable if bicycles held the potential to do near the damage - and the noxious weeds introduced via pack sting crap from their home turf feed and feed that allegedly meets the standards rarely evaluated at fields, none the less in the field for consumption. Yet, a bias is present with a blind eye towards our own appreciation for the use of pack animals in the back country.
I am supportive of pack animals though to frown on hikers / cycles and other human travel while ignoring our own impact is... the beam in our own eye. (Reference to Matthew 7:3)

IMO, Hiking Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Glacier National Park present a limited "consequence" when comparing the natural apex predators who push doe/cow calving to scientific findings of notable declines.

Greater Yellowstone elk suffer worse nutrition and lower birth rates due to wolves

Wolves have caused elk in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem to change their behavior and foraging habits so much so that herds are having fewer calves, mainly due to changes in their nutrition.

www.montana.edu

However, be that as it may, our country, post covid, has brought an onslaught of city people to our country doorstep. If we do not form collective cooperation for trail, forest use, our desire to keep a human minimal impact will be drowned out by those en-masse who've not found an educated council to unify outdoor interests.

Want to use a platform to assist the future of our greater outdoors - we need stop playing enemy vs enemy and find unity where leaders in the cycling industry, pack animal users, backpacker, snowmobile, hunter, cross country skiers - collectives understand the the impacts from biologists, and how to define use to protect our ungulates - as much as our encroaching society continues our parasitic reach deeper into wildlife territory.

 

[Beignet]

Impacts?

View attachment 262067View attachment 262068

Highline?

 

[BUncommon]

View attachment 262060

Taking into account the various pack strings that worm away at erosion to a level beyond acceptable if bicycles held the potential to do near the damage - and the noxious weeds introduced via pack sting crap from their home turf feed and feed that allegedly meets the standards rarely evaluated at fields, none the less in the field for consumption. Yet, a bias is present with a blind eye towards our own appreciation for the use of pack animals in the back country.
I am supportive of pack animals though to frown on hikers / cycles and other human travel while ignoring our own impact is... the beam in our own eye. (Reference to Matthew 7:3)

IMO, Hiking Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Glacier National Park present a limited "consequence" when comparing the natural apex predators who push doe/cow calving to scientific findings of notable declines.

Greater Yellowstone elk suffer worse nutrition and lower birth rates due to wolves

Wolves have caused elk in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem to change their behavior and foraging habits so much so that herds are having fewer calves, mainly due to changes in their nutrition.

www.montana.edu

However, be that as it may, our country, post covid, has brought an onslaught of city people to our country doorstep. If we do not form collective cooperation for trail, forest use, our desire to keep a human minimal impact will be drowned out by those en-masse who've not found an educated council to unify outdoor interests.

Want to use a platform to assist the future of our greater outdoors - we need stop playing enemy vs enemy and find unity where leaders in the cycling industry, pack animal users, backpacker, snowmobile, hunter, cross country skiers - collectives understand the the impacts from biologists, and how to define use to protect our ungulates - as much as our encroaching society continues our parasitic reach deeper into wildlife territory.

People on the outdoors are always going to cause an impact; could be negative, and if they knew enough it could be positive

 

[nrpate05]

I don't really think this needs to be a consumptive vs non-consumptive battle. I think it is more of an education thing. The term non-consumptive came about, I presume, because we thought nothing was harmed in the process. Now we know that not to be the case. Hunters and anglers have paid into a system in which they take a public resource and now we know that mtn bikers, hikers, dog walkers, etc. are essentially doing the same thing, it is just harder to quantify.

Going forward, I think hunters have to work with these groups and try to reach some compromises. Things like not building new trails in calving areas or other critical habitat and seasonal trail closures in important areas as well. I also think it is time for a backpack tax, which the outdoor industry has fought forever. I really don't see a valid argument against it.

I also think that when hunters are in the woods is the least vulnerable time for big game species. If a cow is shot in September or further into the fall, her calf has everything it needs to survive. If a cow abandons that same calf a handful of times from birth thru August, it is unlikely that calf will survive. Or if that cow is stressed through the winter and spring that calf may be aborted. So, yea I think timing definitely matters.

Overall, it is likely the cumulative impacts that are the real reason for a lot of population declines. Winter range turned into subdivisions, drought, shifting vegetation, 24/7 recreation, road construction and road kill, etc. Any one of these may not be an issue on their own, but when combined, animals can lose resilience and population level impacts can follow.

 

[nastynate]

I haven't read the whole thread here but it is interesting. I bet there is an interaction here, where hunted populations are more susceptible to non-consumptive stress... In places where elk learn humans are predators to be avoided, a human is something they will avoid as a matter of life or death. In places where elk learn humans are not a big threat (Estes park?) I suspect elk are far less stressed by their presence. Something to keep in mind.

Such research certainly exists. In ecology, we measure "flight initiation distance"... if you approach an animal how far can you get before they get they flee. Compare squirrels where they are hunted to squirrels on a college campus. Big difference.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I also think that when hunters are in the woods is the least vulnerable time for big game species.

With the huge caveat of Montana...

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I haven't read the whole thread here but it is interesting. I bet there is an interaction here, where hunted populations are more susceptible to non-consumptive stress... In places where elk learn humans are predators to be avoided, a human is something they will avoid as a matter of life or death. In places where elk learn humans are not a big threat (Estes park?) I suspect elk are far less stressed by their presence. Something to keep in mind.

Such research certainly exists. In ecology, we measure "flight initiation distance"... if you approach an animal how far can you get before they get they flee. Compare squirrels where they are hunted to squirrels on a college campus. Big difference.

Where are the elk in Estes during Jan - April?

I think that kinda the problem, folks see elk in Estes during the rut and then just assume that their hiking/biking has zero effect on elk ever, same with mule deer in their yard.

Watching the deer decline in Eagle has been pretty eye opening. My parents built their house in 1998 and there were deer in the yard constantly. If you went up on the BLM behind there house you would always bump them.

2021 I didn't see a single deer track in the yard and very very few on the BLM.

In '98 we were the only house on the block and now the subdivision is full built out. The BLM was still being grazed up until the mid 2000s, and every fall you'd have a couple days where you got stuck behind a drive.

Haven't seen a cow up there in 10 years, chit load of bikers/hikes/cross country skiers etc.

Granted I'm guilty as much as anyone, but in 2010 it was me and like 4 other people that went back there and we were using essentially cow paths, now there is a built trail system.

Last fall I got yelled at by some dude who clearly just moved into the neighborhood from Boston about not picking up after my dog... maybe I was the asshole... but for 20 years I just was kinda use to only me the yotes, and an occasional lion running around up there.

 

[nrpate05]

With the huge caveat of Montana...

Yes this would be a big exception

 

[Sytes]

People on the outdoors are always going to cause an impact; could be negative, and if they knew enough it could be positive

However, be that as it may, our country, post covid, has brought an onslaught of city people to our country doorstep. If we do not form collective cooperation for trail, forest use, our desire to keep a human minimal impact will be drowned out by those en-masse who've not found an educated council to unify outdoor interests.

Want to use a platform to assist the future of our greater outdoors - we need stop playing enemy vs enemy and find unity where leaders in the cycling industry, pack animal users, backpacker, snowmobile, hunter, cross country skiers - collectives understand the the impacts from biologists, and how to define use to protect our ungulates - as much as our encroaching society continues our parasitic reach deeper into wildlife territory.

Agree 100%. Welcome to HT, btw.

 

[nastynate]

Where are the elk in Estes during Jan - April?

I think that kinda the problem, folks see elk in Estes during the rut and then just assume that their hiking/biking has zero effect on elk ever, same with mule deer in their yard.

Watching the deer decline in Eagle has been pretty eye opening. My parents built their house in 1998 and there were deer in the yard constantly. If you went up on the BLM behind there house you would always bump them.

2021 I didn't see a single deer track in the yard and very very few on the BLM.

In '98 we were the only house on the block and now the subdivision is full built out. The BLM was still being grazed up until the mid 2000s, and every fall you'd have a couple days where you got stuck behind a drive.

Haven't seen a cow up there in 10 years, chit load of bikers/hikes/cross country skiers etc.

Granted I'm guilty as much as anyone, but in 2010 it was me and like 4 other people that went back there and we were using essentially cow paths, now there is a built trail system.

Last fall I got yelled at by some dude who clearly just moved into the neighborhood from Boston about not picking up after my dog... maybe I was the asshole... but for 20 years I just was kinda use to only me the yotes, and an occasional lion running around up there.

I think maybe the point I was trying to make is missed, and I shouldn't have used Estes Park as an example because I honestly have no idea what those elk are up to. I assumed they mostly live in Rocky Mountain National Park and are not hunted substantially, and therefore do not have as much of fear of humans as other elk populations, but I don't actually know.

But my intended point is, the non-consumptive effect is BAD. That effect could be exacerbated (more bad!) if the animals are also a heavily hunted population that are rightly terrified of humans because they view them as predators. If they are conditioned by hunting to view humans as really stressful, the effects of "non-consumptive" human pressure at other times of the year could be worse for those animals.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Saw this article this morning. I can’t help but think these types of movements really intensify and speed up disturbance and habitat loss. And I thought the pace was already terrifying.

USDA to use outdoors recreation to boost economy around national forests, grasslands

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture began planning this month to develop outdoor recreation opportunities near national forests and grasslands, part of a broader Biden administration push to help

www.mycouriertribune.com

 

[Sytes]

Coalitions are our friend. Not each outdoor segment to fend for themselves.

Bicker about others only divides us further. Makes me wonder if it's really about ungulates or our own selfish intent at the expense of our ungulate populations.

 

[Eric Albus]

Hard to believe..I find myself in near total agreement with Buzz.

Look at the elk in the Sippary(or slippery) Ann on the CMR. They tolerate a ton of ppl in near proximity. Suburban mule deer and whitetail the same. They have one thing in common. People ain’t stabbing them with arrows or blasting them with rifles. Stop blasting/stabbing them on accessible land for months on end and we’d have wildlife back where they belong.

 

[Nameless Range]

Saw this article this morning. I can’t help but think these types of movements really intensify and speed up disturbance and habitat loss. And I thought the pace was already terrifying.

USDA to use outdoors recreation to boost economy around national forests, grasslands

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture began planning this month to develop outdoor recreation opportunities near national forests and grasslands, part of a broader Biden administration push to help

www.mycouriertribune.com

I had not seen this. Thank you for sharing it. It’s alarming.

Whether it is “Gateway Communities”, the “Frontcountry”, etc. Watch out for abstract Geographic Place names such as those to prime the pumps for development. I do not agree with the concept of a gateway community, nor the front country.

Land managers who have received this MOU and are looking for wins in their careers are now motivated.

I’m currently aware of a coming recreation/fuels project. Combining the two intents - one of which I don’t have much of a problem with, the other I do - seemingly being a way to make resistance to the project more difficult.

 

[Hunting Wife]

I had not seen this. Thank you for sharing it. It’s alarming.

Whether it is “Gateway Communities”, the “Frontcountry”, etc. Watch out for abstract Geographic Place names such as those to prime the pumps for development. I do not agree with the concept of a gateway community, nor the front country.

Land managers who have received this MOU and are looking for wins in their careers are now motivated.

I’m currently aware of a coming recreation/fuels project. Combining the two intents - one of which I don’t have much of a problem with, the other I do - seemingly being a way to make resistance to the project more difficult.

I feel like many officials are throwing around the term “conservation” as they try to sell this, but really they are looking at conservation of open space. They aren’t talking about conservation of habitat, conservation of species, conservation of sanctuary areas, conservation of migration routes….