Wolves RFD-TV Big Game Forever Colorado

[jmden]

Where did you find this tidbit of information? BrentD beat me to it.mtmuley

What specifically are you referring to? That is all very commonly know information.

Wikipedia (really hard to find): "Wolves bear relatively large pups in small litters compared to other canid species.[94] The average litter consists of 5–6 pups,[95] with litter sizes tending to increase in areas where prey is abundant,[95] though exceptionally large litters of 14–17 pups occur only 1% of the time."

International Wolf Center: "A mature female wolf comes into estrus once a year. Thus, a breeding pair produces one litter of pups each spring, but in areas of high prey abundance more than one female in a pack may give birth. An average litter size for gray and red wolves is 4 to 6, but sometimes fewer pups are born and sometimes more."

 

[jmden]

Multiple broods of 6-7 pups per year???? They population increases 30% every year with no hunting/trapping??? No way any of that is true, you must be getting info from LoboWatch. I'm done here. This thread and the information posted on it is worthless, should be locked

Locked because you don't agree with the information? That's really too bad.

 

[jmden]

Let me make it clearer for you. I'm calling bullshit on your statement.

More of the same. Saying nothing and adding nothing to the conversation. Too bad.

 

[The Hedgehog]

As silly as some of them are, if they’re for full on wolf apocalypse- I wish them luck and success.

 

[BrentD]

More of the same. Saying nothing and adding nothing to the conversation. Too bad.

I do not add lies, and fake facts to the conversation. You might try it yourself, though you won't have much to say at all it seems.

 

[jmden]

I do not add lies, and fake facts to the conversation. You might try it yourself, though you won't have much to say at all it seems.

BrentD,

Not sure what words I can use anymore...why don't you just move along.

 

[JLS]

I love management discussions that marginalize facts and rely heavily on political innuendo.

I’m out of this one. Peace out.

 

[jmden]

Wow...seems there are several here that refuse to engage in meaningful conversation in terms of stating their position clearly, supplying evidence to back those positions up, etc. Rather, they just lob bombs with no relevant, helpful or evidential information, but plenty of character assasination. That is really helpful to us all. Congratulations, gentlemen.

 

[bobbydean]

I have never seen a thread on this forum with so little talk on the actual topic.

 

[BrentD]

BrentD,

Not sure what words I can use anymore...why don't you just move along.

Why don't you pony up with some references to primary research that supports your ridiculous claim. Because it is ridiculous. Prove it.

 

[Pelican]

I tried to watch the video on Friday and stopped watching less than minute in when the farm bureau pres. was implying wolves posed a treat to hikers, trail runners, etc. I tried watching it again today and could take only about 6 minutes. I’m not supportive of wolves here in CO simply because we have a population that would not likely approve of wolf hunting like in ID, MT, and WY. If BGF doesn’t find someone more charismatic and less full of it than those on the video, well, they are going to loose. I just don’t see people in CO buying the crap they are selling. I’m not even buying it, and after watching six minutes of it, I don’t want anything to do with BGF either.

 

[BuzzH]

Wow...seems there are several here that refuse to engage in meaningful conversation in terms of stating their position clearly, supplying evidence to back those positions up, etc. Rather, they just lob bombs with no relevant, helpful or evidential information, but plenty of character assasination. That is really helpful to us all. Congratulations, gentlemen.

Do a simple search on wolf threads here on hunttalk. Maybe you'll realize you aren't talking to a bunch of bar-stool wolf experts...you're out of your depth trying to lecture many on this board about the issue. I would reckon some have forgotten more about the issue than you'll ever know.

You really need to research the issue, and your audience, before you come on here blabbing about liberal this, conservative that, super wolf, etc. etc. nonsense. Then post up a bunch of opinion video's, one of which is from a group of numb-nuts that tried to derail the Simpson/Tester rider that delisted wolves in Montana and Idaho. You make it sound as if these ridiculous videos and opinions are peer reviewed science...

All its going to lead this group to believe is you shared a barstool with Toby Bridges and likely drive a minivan...

 

[Grundy53]

jmden: you lost me in your rant about liberals and that wolves are invasive and non-native. wildlife issues are not political to me. I can only imagine where you got your "invasive, non-native" labels for wolves. I am pretty familiar with wolves- you are in Washington and I am in Wisconsin. I am happy they are around. They add another element to the hunt that I enjoy. Sorry you do not feel the same. Also, spewing propaganda and misinformation on the internet probably won't get you too far

You do know there are a lot of wolves in Washington, right?

 

[Sytes]

As mentioned once before, this thread is specific to the threat wolves pose to Colorado's livestock, moose, elk and other fantastic big game species.

Back to the opening post for this thread.

Beyond the slant held (potential for attack on hikers, joggers though wolves threat to humans has occurred on a few rare occasions), it's an accurate assessment of the dangers that are present if the Ted Turner's of pro cuddle puppy wolves are able to manipulate their way into introduction of the grey wolves within Colorado.

url]https://vimeo.com/315433506[/url]

https://vimeo.com/315433506?ref=fb-s...4NOCDqtedFe-YM

I feel for you, Colorado. Ask yourself, if a dramatic decline in elk, moose, and other big game species is worth adding wolves to your ecosystem. For a few of you, maybe so. To others, I couldn't agree with you more... Hell no!

 

[NR_Hunter]

. Studies have shown that wolves tend to increase their populations at over 30% per year even when every effort (hunting, trapping with no seasons) is made to curtail their populations. This information alone is of concern.

Oh jeez it’s almost like they never we extirpated from the west at one point due to those reasons.

 

[Ben Lamb]

There is no actual proof that these are Canadian super-wolves, and contrary to popular belief, the wolves on NW MT migrated here on their own, without reintroduction. This notion that we've introduced the wrong species is falderal and has repeatedly been proven false time and time again, through both the courts and scientific reason. Bayleat's math is poor at best, and assumes a 100% harvest rate in order to reach his astronomical numbers. As far as his career as a state legislator, he sponsored bills that would have kept wolves on the endangered species list, cost the agency millions in free and reduced cost licenses and he's advocated for the transfer & sale of public land, as well as setting seasons in statute. He's not exactly what I'd call a sportsmen's hero when it comes to his legislative career.

The constitutional right to harvest was a bright spot, but like all things w/ Joe, it took a village for him to have a product he could take credit for.

Elk have changed their behavior over the last 30 years, but to think that it's only wolf driven ignores the mountain of science done by the states of Wyoming & Montana, as well as private researchers like Arthur Middleton. Drought, lack of forest management, long seasons (in MT) and habitat productivity versus high-protein feed in a secure setting (hay fields, etc) play a larger role in that than anything else. In central and eastern MT, we see elk select private lands with limited pressure to avoid being shot. We see the same thing in western MT, but because people also see wolves, then it's the big bad woofs fault, and not our season structure or lack of quality eats for elk on public land. We ignore the predation done by black bears & lions and how predation issues are a symptom of much larger issues that should be addressed, and then we think we can play god by eliminating one species in favor of another when that work will just be more pissing of money down a hole with limited to no long term benefit.

Oh jeez it’s almost like they never we extirpated from the west at one point due to those reasons.

We used every means under the sun to eliminate wolves in the past, especially paid trappers & poison by the barrel-full, which also helped eliminate raptors, songbirds, foxes, rodents, etc. That kind of indiscriminate killing is what some of these people want to return too, because they're afraid of wolves.

The science on canid reproductive rates is out there if people really want to look at it. Increased pressure from trapping and hunting equal elevated estrogen levels in females, leading to increased litters and increased number of females breeding in a pack. It also increases testosterone in male wolves, creating animals more likely to depredate on livestock and increase take of wild ungulates. Pack stability is key when looking to manage critters, but the current matrix for management is one that encourages rapid expansion of numbers and destabilized pack dynamics. If you think hunting gets a black eye for how people think hunters view wolves, wait until we bring back bounties, snaring, poison, etc. Pack stability was reached for a while.

The fear of wolves is ridiculous. It's how some people make money off of you, and manipulate you into doing their bidding. SFW & BGF are masters at it, and they're no better than CBD or PETA in that regard. They just happen to play to a conservative audience, rather than big city libs.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Well-said, Ben Lamb!

 

[BrentD]

Ben, I believe you may be off base with the wolf reproduction thing. Coyotes yes. But wolves? Mike Mitchell (Montana Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Unit Leader) was here a year ago or so and I believe he stated and presented data exactly contrary to that.

I think this might have the information you are discussing, but don't have time to read it right now.

https://www.umt.edu/mcwru/MitchellLab/MikeMitchell/Ausband_et_al_2017.pdf

 

[Ben Lamb]

I have to run up to the Capitol, but here's a quick story on it: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/me...ated+stress/10374289/story.html#__federated=1

I think there's a fine line, and you can reach population stability, but you may be sacrificing individual pack stability with hunting & trapping pressure. Not much difference than coyotes, from what I've seen. If you have the Mitchell data, I'd love to take a look at it.

 

[BrentD]

Ben check that publication I linked to. If not there, then there are a couple of others. They aren't coyotes.