Coloradans unleash wolves on their neighbors: A fitting metaphor for COVID

[idaho guy]

The proposal should be put all the wolves in the cities where their protection is voted in 

Well fortunately federal land is geared toward multi use and placed in trust for all citizens, and our wildlife is also placed in trust for the public. It seems fitting to me the public having input on how their trust lands and wildlife are managed. That is the beautiful thing about this country, thank you Mr. Roosevelt.

Teddy Roosevelt is probably rolling over in his grave over the stupidity of this one. Ballot box wildlife management was never part of the North American wildlife model, which I agree is most successful wildlife management plan in the world. Ballot box wildlife management will be the ruin of what mr Roosevelt’s gift to us was. There is over 25 years of firsthand documented facts that disprove every lie the biologist told us in Idaho 25 years ago. They are using the EXACT talking points to reintroduce wolves to Colorado right now. It’s all been shown to be bullcrap which we thought anyways but now it’s proven with decades of on the ground evidence. It’s a shame to see this but oh well have fun with the wolves Colorado.

This is the key point right here! Whether you like or dislike wolves, THIS IS IT!

Ballot box wildlife management was never part of the North American wildlife model, which I agree is most successful wildlife management plan in the world. Ballot box wildlife management will be the ruin of what mr Roosevelt’s gift to us was.

A central tenet of the NAMWC is that the wildlife are owned by the people - a stark contrast to the days of game being owned by the king.  In that sense, I disagree with these proclamations that 'ballot box management' is not part of the NAMWC.  If the people who own the wildlife choose to do something by a vote of the people, that is their prerogative...however strenuously I or other hunters may dislike the outcome.  Reintroducing wolves, banning bear baiting and hounds, allocating a certain percentage of elk tags to non-residents are all value judgments which will vary based on the electorate...the 'owners'.  While science may provide information about how introducing an apex predator will effect other species and their habitat, it really is up to the 'owners' to decide what they prefer...in Colorado (and probably Washington if there were ever a similar vote!) a majority prefer wolves on the landscape, even if that means fewer elk and deer.

 

I didn’t say as owners we shouldn’t have a say we shouldn’t ask the game departments to manage all the wildlife on our behalf but cherry pick certain decisions that we get to decide. Game departments are either given authority to manage the resources or they are not. Picking highly emotional issues that have massive implications shouldn’t be independently “managed” by a bunch of city people who spend almost no time in the woods. If we can vote on all these predators we should vote on deer and elk seasons ALL of them.I have a vote for the state of Washington right now. All those Trophy elk areas you are waiting 20 years to draw but native Americans can hunt with no limits(one of which is an Idaho tribe not even living there) vote on open season for all hunters until the tribes decide to also regulate their harvest? Why aren’t we voting on these seasons if we get to vote on all the predator issues.? Key tenant of North American wildlife model is public ownership of wildlife but historically we had the wisdom to defer management to a paid group of professionals. If we need to vote on predators we need to vote on prey seasons too. You defer management or you don’t as an owner. I pray we collectively defer management as much as we all can find fault in our game departments

[bearpaw]

I elk hunt with wolves and have not noticed a change in success

This in itself is a testament to either your lack of knowledge, gullibility to false narrative, or lack of experience!

You might fool the nonhunting public with such fallacies but you are wasting your time here, members here have seen the damage inflicted by wolves, and history is bound to repeat itself in Colorado just as it has in every other wolf infested state and province, enough said! 

[h20hunter]

"You are wasting your time here"

Again,  enough said.

[idaho guy]

Why do some things go to the ballot and others not?  There is no bright clear line and of course it varies by state, but its usually bigger, statewide policy issues of political importance/significance/interest.  The 'feely/emotional' stuff typically arrives out of political interest.

We don't put up ballot measures for smaller, less significant issues (e.g., to adjust quality elk permits in the colockum) but there is still a public process for setting those numbers.  We may not get what we individually want, but in general the NAMWC facilitates public input on the management of public resources...and as we all know, even one user group (hunters) do not uniformly agree on any given set of values or decisions...which can make things tough even for well intentioned wildlife managers.

 

This won’t work and why it will be the end of the North American wildlife model. Input should be gathered just like it is now with ultimate authority for the decision left to those responsible for the results. You can’t give someone responsibility for an outcome but not the authority to make crucial decisions. Simple analogy I own a farm but know nothing on how to run one. I hire you as the manager and ask that you create as much alfalfa as the land can yield to sale at top dollar. You do all the work and use the profits to improve the land install irrigation etc. it works great until I the owner fall in love with the little flowers on knapweed and decide because I am emotional on the little flowers that I need to make that decision. Doesn’t matter what facts you provide I love knapweed and will make that decision no matter what you say. Does that work? Or does it fail? Our wildlife model works because we managed historically for maximum game populations and license revenue went back to sustain and improve those herds for the future. Now we are taking critical predator decisions away from them at a time when habitat is being lost daily to development? That’s like my farm analogy I still want to sell the same tonnage of alfalfa but I introduced knapweed and by the way I sold 1/2 the acreage. You can make a theoretical argument that we will only vote on the emotional issues but you can’t disagree with my statement that it will be the end of the North American wildlife model. As owners we really can decide it’s fate or we can argue little points of what we should do as owners and by the way we have the right to do this or that. If we care about wildlife we really need to look at the big 100 year picture fights over wether we can hand select management decisions will do nothing to save the model for our kids and grandkids

[idahohuntr]

The proposal should be put all the wolves in the cities where their protection is voted in 

Well fortunately federal land is geared toward multi use and placed in trust for all citizens, and our wildlife is also placed in trust for the public. It seems fitting to me the public having input on how their trust lands and wildlife are managed. That is the beautiful thing about this country, thank you Mr. Roosevelt.

Teddy Roosevelt is probably rolling over in his grave over the stupidity of this one. Ballot box wildlife management was never part of the North American wildlife model, which I agree is most successful wildlife management plan in the world. Ballot box wildlife management will be the ruin of what mr Roosevelt’s gift to us was. There is over 25 years of firsthand documented facts that disprove every lie the biologist told us in Idaho 25 years ago. They are using the EXACT talking points to reintroduce wolves to Colorado right now. It’s all been shown to be bullcrap which we thought anyways but now it’s proven with decades of on the ground evidence. It’s a shame to see this but oh well have fun with the wolves Colorado.

This is the key point right here! Whether you like or dislike wolves, THIS IS IT!

Ballot box wildlife management was never part of the North American wildlife model, which I agree is most successful wildlife management plan in the world. Ballot box wildlife management will be the ruin of what mr Roosevelt’s gift to us was.

A central tenet of the NAMWC is that the wildlife are owned by the people - a stark contrast to the days of game being owned by the king.  In that sense, I disagree with these proclamations that 'ballot box management' is not part of the NAMWC.  If the people who own the wildlife choose to do something by a vote of the people, that is their prerogative...however strenuously I or other hunters may dislike the outcome.  Reintroducing wolves, banning bear baiting and hounds, allocating a certain percentage of elk tags to non-residents are all value judgments which will vary based on the electorate...the 'owners'.  While science may provide information about how introducing an apex predator will effect other species and their habitat, it really is up to the 'owners' to decide what they prefer...in Colorado (and probably Washington if there were ever a similar vote!) a majority prefer wolves on the landscape, even if that means fewer elk and deer.

 

I didn’t say as owners we shouldn’t have a say we shouldn’t ask the game departments to manage all the wildlife on our behalf but cherry pick certain decisions that we get to decide. Game departments are either given authority to manage the resources or they are not. Picking highly emotional issues that have massive implications shouldn’t be independently “managed” by a bunch of city people who spend almost no time in the woods. If we can vote on all these predators we should vote on deer and elk seasons ALL of them.I have a vote for the state of Washington right now. All those Trophy elk areas you are waiting 20 years to draw but native Americans can hunt with no limits(one of which is an Idaho tribe not even living there) vote on open season for all hunters until the tribes decide to also regulate their harvest? Why aren’t we voting on these seasons if we get to vote on all the predator issues.? Key tenant of North American wildlife model is public ownership of wildlife but historically we had the wisdom to defer management to a paid group of professionals. If we need to vote on predators we need to vote on prey seasons too. You defer management or you don’t as an owner. I pray we collectively defer management as much as we all can find fault in our game departments

Professionals are not where major policy decisions come from and data and science don't dictate the public's values (e.g., predators, hounds, baiting etc.).  Once the professionals know the public's desires/goals, they can manage accordingly.

Also, you are free to attempt to put up a ballot initiative so non-tribal hunters have seasons equivalent to Native American Treaty tribes...have at it...there is absolutely no reason (other than your own ambition or desires) you cannot do this.  It would require the same effort as any other ballot initiative (e.g., hounds and baiting).   

[idaho guy]

The proposal should be put all the wolves in the cities where their protection is voted in 

Well fortunately federal land is geared toward multi use and placed in trust for all citizens, and our wildlife is also placed in trust for the public. It seems fitting to me the public having input on how their trust lands and wildlife are managed. That is the beautiful thing about this country, thank you Mr. Roosevelt.

Teddy Roosevelt is probably rolling over in his grave over the stupidity of this one. Ballot box wildlife management was never part of the North American wildlife model, which I agree is most successful wildlife management plan in the world. Ballot box wildlife management will be the ruin of what mr Roosevelt’s gift to us was. There is over 25 years of firsthand documented facts that disprove every lie the biologist told us in Idaho 25 years ago. They are using the EXACT talking points to reintroduce wolves to Colorado right now. It’s all been shown to be bullcrap which we thought anyways but now it’s proven with decades of on the ground evidence. It’s a shame to see this but oh well have fun with the wolves Colorado.

This is the key point right here! Whether you like or dislike wolves, THIS IS IT!

Ballot box wildlife management was never part of the North American wildlife model, which I agree is most successful wildlife management plan in the world. Ballot box wildlife management will be the ruin of what mr Roosevelt’s gift to us was.

A central tenet of the NAMWC is that the wildlife are owned by the people - a stark contrast to the days of game being owned by the king.  In that sense, I disagree with these proclamations that 'ballot box management' is not part of the NAMWC.  If the people who own the wildlife choose to do something by a vote of the people, that is their prerogative...however strenuously I or other hunters may dislike the outcome.  Reintroducing wolves, banning bear baiting and hounds, allocating a certain percentage of elk tags to non-residents are all value judgments which will vary based on the electorate...the 'owners'.  While science may provide information about how introducing an apex predator will effect other species and their habitat, it really is up to the 'owners' to decide what they prefer...in Colorado (and probably Washington if there were ever a similar vote!) a majority prefer wolves on the landscape, even if that means fewer elk and deer.

Well stated.               

   

I want hydrophilic to explain Yellowstone and all the features and benefits wolves provided. It’s the closest recent example of wolf reintroduction and what Colorado is doing. Both huge elk herds in the Rockies.25 years with wolves and 25 years without. What does the science tell us about the Health of the elk herds in Yellowstone and Colorado? with the benefit of 25 years of hindsight?

[KFhunter]

In another thread plz

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[KFhunter]

If the ballot box said to eradicate all wolves in their respective state, such as Wyoming, then would idahohunter and hydro support that?



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

IDH?

Hydro?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[bearpaw]

If the ballot box said to eradicate all wolves in their respective state, such as Wyoming, then would idahohunter and hydro support that?



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

IDH?

Hydro?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

   Good question, let's hear some answers?

[KFhunter]

For Hydro

We've had these wolf discussions for years here on HW, and for years we've had members saying wolves won't impact hunting, yet here we're now seeing APR restrictions in dist 1 for whitetail deer limiting to 4pt and above which is unprecedented, our herds are collapsing.
We've seen big reductions to moose permits, and lost most cow elk hunts.  Youth moose has (1) permit available lol.

And we're not done yet, the next 3 year cycle will see more reductions yet.


Read through some of the mega threads dating back 8-10 years in the wolf section and see who says what, most of these very vocal pro-wolf members from the past are now silent on the issue.

[bearpaw]

Look no further than the Lolo zone in Idaho or the Yellowstone herd in MT for answers. Both of those herds used to provide some of the best elk hunting in the world, now the hunting seasons in those areas that once provided trophy animals and freezers full of meat have greatly reduced seasons and in some cases the seasons have been eliminated entirely.

[idaho guy]

For Hydro

We've had these wolf discussions for years here on HW, and for years we've had members saying wolves won't impact hunting, yet here we're now seeing APR restrictions in dist 1 for whitetail deer limiting to 4pt and above which is unprecedented, our herds are collapsing.
We've seen big reductions to moose permits, and lost most cow elk hunts.  Youth moose has (1) permit available lol.

And we're not done yet, the next 3 year cycle will see more reductions yet.


Read through some of the mega threads dating back 8-10 years in the wolf section and see who says what, most of these very vocal pro-wolf members from the past are now silent on the issue.

 

  Crickets. Funny how most of the negative effects that were feared have already happened but none of the pro wolfers ever talk about it anymore. It’s all going to be ok they said we all just need to become better hunters  funny part is killing Idaho elk in some ways got easier they all moved to town! To get away from the wolves but great backcountry habitat is almost devoid of any elk or deer. It doesn’t matter I guess I live in Idaho and we’re practically to the point of hunting and trapping them year around. It’s helping but some areas will never ever be the same. It’s sad to see Colorado get sucked into the same mess.

[Miles]

For you Washington residents that don’t know, they’re already here in Colorado.  This will just speed the process up...

[Hydrophilic]

If the ballot box said to eradicate all wolves in their respective state, such as Wyoming, then would idahohunter and hydro support that?



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

For a moderator I expected better from you. How are you going to moderate in an unbiased fashion if you are clearly and regularly trying to engage me with your bias? So far there have been personal attacks against me that have not been moderated. Am I to assume this is because of your bias? In which case, is this how this forum is supposed to be moderated?

https://www.fws.gov/hunting/north-american-model-of-wildlife-conservation.html

Number 1,4,6,7.

A) Explain to me how that would be remotely plausible, let alone legal.
B) Federal land.
C) This scenario in general is why so many other user groups genuinely dislike hunters.

114 was Colorado proposition, as such it pertained to Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Parks_and_Wildlife

The feds and federal lands have their own processes. States have their own endangered/sensitive listings, Feds have the ESA, of which the grey wolf is no longer listed. A species can be state listed but not fed listed. Aside from a conservation argument, an ethical argument, and a federal lands argument, the state of Wyoming would be highly suspect if it refused to enforce it's OWN current wolf plan, and it's not even a question of whether your suggested intentional extirpation ballot proposition is remotely plausible. That's just a long winded way for me to say - That's irrelevant.

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Wildlife/Large%20Carnivore/WYWOLF_MANAGEMENT_PLAN_FINAL.pdf

https://www.fws.gov/wyominges/species_concern.php

"Population Objectives: Upon delisting, Wyoming will maintain at least 10 breeding pairs and
at least 100 wolves within the state outside YNP and the WRR"

[idahohuntr]

Look no further than the Lolo zone in Idaho or the Yellowstone herd in MT for answers. Both of those herds used to provide some of the best elk hunting in the world, now the hunting seasons in those areas that once provided trophy animals and freezers full of meat have greatly reduced seasons and in some cases the seasons have been eliminated entirely.

The Northern Idaho Panhandle is the top producing elk zone in Idaho.