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

[idaho guy]

Did you look at the data for mule deer populations in those units???

Wenaha went from 2600 to 1350 in the last 4 years with an objective of 4K.
Minam went from 2600 to 1700 in the last 5 years and has objective of 7k.
Walla walla declined from 1900 to 1500 with an objective of 1900.
Also that same data says that walla walla has a 100% fawn winter survival rate.
That’s gotta be good data.

 Also keep in mind those numbers are all estimated.

Wenaha has a management objective of 4K for elk in that unit. It’s currently half that.
The calf to cow ratio in minam and wenaha has gone down. As has the ratio of calf to cows for Roosevelt elk in general.

So looking at the data put forth by ODFW there are places where the elk are now above MO and places that are well below. Would be interesting to see a correlation of ag or private land vs wild.

https://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/2019_Oregon_Wolf_Plan.pdf

In the odfw wolf management plan they state they have reached the management objective in the eastern part of the state and according to their own numbers are 3 times above the population goal for the area they inhabit. So by their own admission they are above objective and they also state that human take could increase by 5 to 10 percent without causing a population decline. Meaning they could have a hunting and trapping season to manage The population that is above population goals but they don’t. In their management plan I found no mention of civilian control of population at all. Curious as they admitted to having multiple problems with wolf interactions. They also state the goal to manage wolves like other game animals in the state but they are not doing that. So they are not even sticking to their own management plan. Montana and Idaho have stable wolf populations even with hunting and trapping. So why not include that as a management plan for a species that is 3x above its population numbers?

And what about Zebra in Africa? Mule Deer are an entirely different conversation.

Wenaha has had a large elk MO for a long time, it doesn't mean the herd is unhealthy, it means there is a Management objective for where they would like the herd to be, depending on many situations. Quality hunting opportunity, land owner complaints, over browsing sensitive habitat, etc. Wenaha used to have a pretty lousy elk population way back when...decades before the wolves. It has been increasing steadily.

Please, what are your thoughts on increasing elk populations in those 3 units with wolf populations? What are your thoughts on Idahos current elk population compared to the 1995 elk population when wolves were reintroduced. And what are your thoughts on record levels of elk harvest in Idaho - "For the sixth straight year, Idaho elk hunters harvested more than 20,000 elk, good for the second best stretch in the state's history"? Don't dodge me. Let's have a discussion.

I’m sorry I guess I didn’t realize that wolves don’t eat mule deer. I said it before and I’ll tell you again. Harvest numbers are not scientific. They are based on self reporting by hunters. There are a bunch of factors that can increase harvest numbers. License sales increase, better opportunity because of elk being pressured into more accessible areas. Let’s look at the actual data from ODFW. Did you notice that the bull and calf to cow ratios are down? Meaning that the weakest members are being picked off creating a different herd dynamic. Again do you believe that mule deer fawns had a 100% survival rate in walla walla for 5 straight years? ODFW does. Why are you dodging me on the population numbers of wolves and their management objective? It clearly states they have 158 wolves and their objective is 48-49. Are we talking about IDaho or Oregon or Colorado? You want to talk data but then dismiss other data put forth from the same source. I asked you about scientists asking for a natural migration of wolves into Colorado instead of a forced introduction and.... it would seem you are dodging me not vice versa. Idaho also manages its populations and has a steady population of wolves. Pregón admits to having more wolves than their objective but doesn’t touch them. Did you even read the management plan??

 

Platensek you can’t argue with a fool and win. You are spot on and are arguing for wolf management not elimination. He just proved your point with his Idaho success rates 1994 30000 elk harvested. 1995 wolves planted and left largely unmanaged for 15 years and harvest success in 2011 is 15000 a 50 percent decrease. Aggressive wolf management for 10 years we are back to 20000. He made your point that both predators and prey have to be managed. Ask him to show the elk populations every year since wolves in Idaho and you will see similar story but the real answer there is WHERE the elk are. Traditional greatest habitat for elk in Idaho our wilderness areas have had elk populations decimated. A lot of elk are in town now or crowded on ag land due to wolf pressure in the high country.

[ne kid]

Voters control the game LOL. I'm still waiting for 30$ tabs

[Platensek-po]

Did you look at the data for mule deer populations in those units???

Wenaha went from 2600 to 1350 in the last 4 years with an objective of 4K.
Minam went from 2600 to 1700 in the last 5 years and has objective of 7k.
Walla walla declined from 1900 to 1500 with an objective of 1900.
Also that same data says that walla walla has a 100% fawn winter survival rate.
That’s gotta be good data.

 Also keep in mind those numbers are all estimated.

Wenaha has a management objective of 4K for elk in that unit. It’s currently half that.
The calf to cow ratio in minam and wenaha has gone down. As has the ratio of calf to cows for Roosevelt elk in general.

So looking at the data put forth by ODFW there are places where the elk are now above MO and places that are well below. Would be interesting to see a correlation of ag or private land vs wild.

https://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/2019_Oregon_Wolf_Plan.pdf

In the odfw wolf management plan they state they have reached the management objective in the eastern part of the state and according to their own numbers are 3 times above the population goal for the area they inhabit. So by their own admission they are above objective and they also state that human take could increase by 5 to 10 percent without causing a population decline. Meaning they could have a hunting and trapping season to manage The population that is above population goals but they don’t. In their management plan I found no mention of civilian control of population at all. Curious as they admitted to having multiple problems with wolf interactions. They also state the goal to manage wolves like other game animals in the state but they are not doing that. So they are not even sticking to their own management plan. Montana and Idaho have stable wolf populations even with hunting and trapping. So why not include that as a management plan for a species that is 3x above its population numbers?

And what about Zebra in Africa? Mule Deer are an entirely different conversation.

Wenaha has had a large elk MO for a long time, it doesn't mean the herd is unhealthy, it means there is a Management objective for where they would like the herd to be, depending on many situations. Quality hunting opportunity, land owner complaints, over browsing sensitive habitat, etc. Wenaha used to have a pretty lousy elk population way back when...decades before the wolves. It has been increasing steadily.

Please, what are your thoughts on increasing elk populations in those 3 units with wolf populations? What are your thoughts on Idahos current elk population compared to the 1995 elk population when wolves were reintroduced. And what are your thoughts on record levels of elk harvest in Idaho - "For the sixth straight year, Idaho elk hunters harvested more than 20,000 elk, good for the second best stretch in the state's history"? Don't dodge me. Let's have a discussion.

I’m sorry I guess I didn’t realize that wolves don’t eat mule deer. I said it before and I’ll tell you again. Harvest numbers are not scientific. They are based on self reporting by hunters. There are a bunch of factors that can increase harvest numbers. License sales increase, better opportunity because of elk being pressured into more accessible areas. Let’s look at the actual data from ODFW. Did you notice that the bull and calf to cow ratios are down? Meaning that the weakest members are being picked off creating a different herd dynamic. Again do you believe that mule deer fawns had a 100% survival rate in walla walla for 5 straight years? ODFW does. Why are you dodging me on the population numbers of wolves and their management objective? It clearly states they have 158 wolves and their objective is 48-49. Are we talking about IDaho or Oregon or Colorado? You want to talk data but then dismiss other data put forth from the same source. I asked you about scientists asking for a natural migration of wolves into Colorado instead of a forced introduction and.... it would seem you are dodging me not vice versa. Idaho also manages its populations and has a steady population of wolves. Pregón admits to having more wolves than their objective but doesn’t touch them. Did you even read the management plan??

I'll be glad to talk about Mule deer later but first we need to resolve our conversation about elk because so much misinformation is spread here it should be illegal and against the AUP.

Did you read the data I provided? I included population numbers, not just harvest numbers. I can only do so much aside from holding your eyes open to make you read the data which I am getting directly from each states Fish and Game dept.

I'll just start lugging all of it around on all of my posts until someone reads it. Maybe I'll add Wyoming as well, just because I'm feeling nice tonight.

I am not intending to dodge your wolf data. If a state has a management objective for wolves then it is reasonable to follow it, I am fine with that and I argued against an environmental group who tried to weasel out of the wolf plan they helped design some years earlier. This Elk herd in Montana is 800% over MO, it needs to be managed too.

https://billingsgazette.com/lifestyles/recreation/snowy-mountains-elk-herd-800-over-population-shows-montanas-challenge-managing-elk/article_161227e0-0ba1-5cf8-8235-a12d34666536.html

MY DATA - PLEASE READ AND RESPOND

Oregon

Walla Walla
2002: 1,500
2005: 1,450
2008: 1,500
2011: 1,500
2014: 1,690
2016: 1,700
2019: 1,700

Minam
2002: 1,800
2005: 2,000
2008: 2,100
2011: 2,100
2014: 2,450
2016: 2,500
2019: 2,500

Wenaha
2002: 1300
2005: 1350
2008: 1,600
2011: 1,600
2014: 2,450
2016: 2,600
2019: 2,700

THIS INCREASE IN ELK HAS BEEN ACCOMPANIED BY INCREASING WOLVES
https://dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/population.asp

Source: ODFW
--------------------

Idaho

Elk population
1995 (year wolves were reintroduced): 112,333
Current: 120,000

Source: IDFG
---------------------

Wyoming

Elk Population
2004: 88,614
2020: 112,900

Source: WGFD (also attached below)
2020 article proclaiming "The Decade of Elk" in Wyoming

https://capcity.news/latest-news/2020/09/22/decade-of-the-elk-for-hunters-as-herds-top-goals-by-32/

Wait now we are talking about Wyoming?? This whole thing is crazy. What are the plus minus numbers on the population data for elk? A difference between 112 and 120k might even be within the plus minus. Also it’s very likely that if elk are being pushed out of the wilderness onto ag and private then they would be easier to count and their numbers would appear to increase. Hard to tell from a very non scientific power point graph. Wyoming’s elk is a special case. They have the lowest human population, the most parks and wilderness and great management. The fact that elk populations could be increasing along with that of wolves is irrelevant. The fact is they need to be managed per ODFWs plan. Washington’s wolves are also above objective. Idaho and Montana have proven that hunting can be an effective tool for managing wolves. Let’s start there and work out.

[Platensek-po]

Did you look at the data for mule deer populations in those units???

Wenaha went from 2600 to 1350 in the last 4 years with an objective of 4K.
Minam went from 2600 to 1700 in the last 5 years and has objective of 7k.
Walla walla declined from 1900 to 1500 with an objective of 1900.
Also that same data says that walla walla has a 100% fawn winter survival rate.
That’s gotta be good data.

 Also keep in mind those numbers are all estimated.

Wenaha has a management objective of 4K for elk in that unit. It’s currently half that.
The calf to cow ratio in minam and wenaha has gone down. As has the ratio of calf to cows for Roosevelt elk in general.

So looking at the data put forth by ODFW there are places where the elk are now above MO and places that are well below. Would be interesting to see a correlation of ag or private land vs wild.

https://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/2019_Oregon_Wolf_Plan.pdf

In the odfw wolf management plan they state they have reached the management objective in the eastern part of the state and according to their own numbers are 3 times above the population goal for the area they inhabit. So by their own admission they are above objective and they also state that human take could increase by 5 to 10 percent without causing a population decline. Meaning they could have a hunting and trapping season to manage The population that is above population goals but they don’t. In their management plan I found no mention of civilian control of population at all. Curious as they admitted to having multiple problems with wolf interactions. They also state the goal to manage wolves like other game animals in the state but they are not doing that. So they are not even sticking to their own management plan. Montana and Idaho have stable wolf populations even with hunting and trapping. So why not include that as a management plan for a species that is 3x above its population numbers?

And what about Zebra in Africa? Mule Deer are an entirely different conversation.

Wenaha has had a large elk MO for a long time, it doesn't mean the herd is unhealthy, it means there is a Management objective for where they would like the herd to be, depending on many situations. Quality hunting opportunity, land owner complaints, over browsing sensitive habitat, etc. Wenaha used to have a pretty lousy elk population way back when...decades before the wolves. It has been increasing steadily.

Please, what are your thoughts on increasing elk populations in those 3 units with wolf populations? What are your thoughts on Idahos current elk population compared to the 1995 elk population when wolves were reintroduced. And what are your thoughts on record levels of elk harvest in Idaho - "For the sixth straight year, Idaho elk hunters harvested more than 20,000 elk, good for the second best stretch in the state's history"? Don't dodge me. Let's have a discussion.

I’m sorry I guess I didn’t realize that wolves don’t eat mule deer. I said it before and I’ll tell you again. Harvest numbers are not scientific. They are based on self reporting by hunters. There are a bunch of factors that can increase harvest numbers. License sales increase, better opportunity because of elk being pressured into more accessible areas. Let’s look at the actual data from ODFW. Did you notice that the bull and calf to cow ratios are down? Meaning that the weakest members are being picked off creating a different herd dynamic. Again do you believe that mule deer fawns had a 100% survival rate in walla walla for 5 straight years? ODFW does. Why are you dodging me on the population numbers of wolves and their management objective? It clearly states they have 158 wolves and their objective is 48-49. Are we talking about IDaho or Oregon or Colorado? You want to talk data but then dismiss other data put forth from the same source. I asked you about scientists asking for a natural migration of wolves into Colorado instead of a forced introduction and.... it would seem you are dodging me not vice versa. Idaho also manages its populations and has a steady population of wolves. Pregón admits to having more wolves than their objective but doesn’t touch them. Did you even read the management plan??

 

Platensek you can’t argue with a fool and win. You are spot on and are arguing for wolf management not elimination. He just proved your point with his Idaho success rates 1994 30000 elk harvested. 1995 wolves planted and left largely unmanaged for 15 years and harvest success in 2011 is 15000 a 50 percent decrease. Aggressive wolf management for 10 years we are back to 20000. He made your point that both predators and prey have to be managed. Ask him to show the elk populations every year since wolves in Idaho and you will see similar story but the real answer there is WHERE the elk are. Traditional greatest habitat for elk in Idaho our wilderness areas have had elk populations decimated. A lot of elk are in town now or crowded on ag land due to wolf pressure in the high country.

That’s all I really want. I want wolves on the landscape and I want them managed correctly. Seems to me every time someone suggests that wolves be managed someone says no because of feelings and not facts. I don’t know if Oregon and Washington are at the same level as Idaho or Montana yet but they have populations that could be managed and allowing hunters to participate in that management would do wonders for everyone but die hard wolf lovers.

[idaho guy]

Did you look at the data for mule deer populations in those units???

Wenaha went from 2600 to 1350 in the last 4 years with an objective of 4K.
Minam went from 2600 to 1700 in the last 5 years and has objective of 7k.
Walla walla declined from 1900 to 1500 with an objective of 1900.
Also that same data says that walla walla has a 100% fawn winter survival rate.
That’s gotta be good data.

 Also keep in mind those numbers are all estimated.

Wenaha has a management objective of 4K for elk in that unit. It’s currently half that.
The calf to cow ratio in minam and wenaha has gone down. As has the ratio of calf to cows for Roosevelt elk in general.

So looking at the data put forth by ODFW there are places where the elk are now above MO and places that are well below. Would be interesting to see a correlation of ag or private land vs wild.

https://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/2019_Oregon_Wolf_Plan.pdf

In the odfw wolf management plan they state they have reached the management objective in the eastern part of the state and according to their own numbers are 3 times above the population goal for the area they inhabit. So by their own admission they are above objective and they also state that human take could increase by 5 to 10 percent without causing a population decline. Meaning they could have a hunting and trapping season to manage The population that is above population goals but they don’t. In their management plan I found no mention of civilian control of population at all. Curious as they admitted to having multiple problems with wolf interactions. They also state the goal to manage wolves like other game animals in the state but they are not doing that. So they are not even sticking to their own management plan. Montana and Idaho have stable wolf populations even with hunting and trapping. So why not include that as a management plan for a species that is 3x above its population numbers?

And what about Zebra in Africa? Mule Deer are an entirely different conversation.

Wenaha has had a large elk MO for a long time, it doesn't mean the herd is unhealthy, it means there is a Management objective for where they would like the herd to be, depending on many situations. Quality hunting opportunity, land owner complaints, over browsing sensitive habitat, etc. Wenaha used to have a pretty lousy elk population way back when...decades before the wolves. It has been increasing steadily.

Please, what are your thoughts on increasing elk populations in those 3 units with wolf populations? What are your thoughts on Idahos current elk population compared to the 1995 elk population when wolves were reintroduced. And what are your thoughts on record levels of elk harvest in Idaho - "For the sixth straight year, Idaho elk hunters harvested more than 20,000 elk, good for the second best stretch in the state's history"? Don't dodge me. Let's have a discussion.

I’m sorry I guess I didn’t realize that wolves don’t eat mule deer. I said it before and I’ll tell you again. Harvest numbers are not scientific. They are based on self reporting by hunters. There are a bunch of factors that can increase harvest numbers. License sales increase, better opportunity because of elk being pressured into more accessible areas. Let’s look at the actual data from ODFW. Did you notice that the bull and calf to cow ratios are down? Meaning that the weakest members are being picked off creating a different herd dynamic. Again do you believe that mule deer fawns had a 100% survival rate in walla walla for 5 straight years? ODFW does. Why are you dodging me on the population numbers of wolves and their management objective? It clearly states they have 158 wolves and their objective is 48-49. Are we talking about IDaho or Oregon or Colorado? You want to talk data but then dismiss other data put forth from the same source. I asked you about scientists asking for a natural migration of wolves into Colorado instead of a forced introduction and.... it would seem you are dodging me not vice versa. Idaho also manages its populations and has a steady population of wolves. Pregón admits to having more wolves than their objective but doesn’t touch them. Did you even read the management plan??

I'll be glad to talk about Mule deer later but first we need to resolve our conversation about elk because so much misinformation is spread here it should be illegal and against the AUP.

Did you read the data I provided? I included population numbers, not just harvest numbers. I can only do so much aside from holding your eyes open to make you read the data which I am getting directly from each states Fish and Game dept.

I'll just start lugging all of it around on all of my posts until someone reads it. Maybe I'll add Wyoming as well, just because I'm feeling nice tonight.

I am not intending to dodge your wolf data. If a state has a management objective for wolves then it is reasonable to follow it, I am fine with that and I argued against an environmental group who tried to weasel out of the wolf plan they helped design some years earlier. This Elk herd in Montana is 800% over MO, it needs to be managed too.

https://billingsgazette.com/lifestyles/recreation/snowy-mountains-elk-herd-800-over-population-shows-montanas-challenge-managing-elk/article_161227e0-0ba1-5cf8-8235-a12d34666536.html

MY DATA - PLEASE READ AND RESPOND

Oregon

Walla Walla
2002: 1,500
2005: 1,450
2008: 1,500
2011: 1,500
2014: 1,690
2016: 1,700
2019: 1,700

Minam
2002: 1,800
2005: 2,000
2008: 2,100
2011: 2,100
2014: 2,450
2016: 2,500
2019: 2,500

Wenaha
2002: 1300
2005: 1350
2008: 1,600
2011: 1,600
2014: 2,450
2016: 2,600
2019: 2,700

THIS INCREASE IN ELK HAS BEEN ACCOMPANIED BY INCREASING WOLVES
https://dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/population.asp

Source: ODFW
--------------------

Idaho

Elk population
1995 (year wolves were reintroduced): 112,333
Current: 120,000

Source: IDFG
---------------------

Wyoming

Elk Population
2004: 88,614
2020: 112,900

Source: WGFD (also attached below)
2020 article proclaiming "The Decade of Elk" in Wyoming

https://capcity.news/latest-news/2020/09/22/decade-of-the-elk-for-hunters-as-herds-top-goals-by-32/

Wait now we are talking about Wyoming?? This whole thing is crazy. What are the plus minus numbers on the population data for elk? A difference between 112 and 120k might even be within the plus minus. Also it’s very likely that if elk are being pushed out of the wilderness onto ag and private then they would be easier to count and their numbers would appear to increase. Hard to tell from a very non scientific power point graph. Wyoming’s elk is a special case. They have the lowest human population, the most parks and wilderness and great management. The fact that elk populations could be increasing along with that of wolves is irrelevant. The fact is they need to be managed per ODFWs plan. Washington’s wolves are also above objective. Idaho and Montana have proven that hunting can be an effective tool for managing wolves. Let’s start there and work out.

   

Proven fact that a large number of elk are being pushed onto ag and out of the high country from wolf pressure. So bad that Idaho had to pay a farmer over 1 million due to depredation of crops. It’s actually making Idaho’s harvest numbers higher because the answer they came up with are cow tags that are rifle tags with an August 1 st to December 31 season. Those tags should run close to 100 percent success. It’s a 5 month rifle cow tag

[idaho guy]

Did you look at the data for mule deer populations in those units???

Wenaha went from 2600 to 1350 in the last 4 years with an objective of 4K.
Minam went from 2600 to 1700 in the last 5 years and has objective of 7k.
Walla walla declined from 1900 to 1500 with an objective of 1900.
Also that same data says that walla walla has a 100% fawn winter survival rate.
That’s gotta be good data.

 Also keep in mind those numbers are all estimated.

Wenaha has a management objective of 4K for elk in that unit. It’s currently half that.
The calf to cow ratio in minam and wenaha has gone down. As has the ratio of calf to cows for Roosevelt elk in general.

So looking at the data put forth by ODFW there are places where the elk are now above MO and places that are well below. Would be interesting to see a correlation of ag or private land vs wild.

https://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/2019_Oregon_Wolf_Plan.pdf

In the odfw wolf management plan they state they have reached the management objective in the eastern part of the state and according to their own numbers are 3 times above the population goal for the area they inhabit. So by their own admission they are above objective and they also state that human take could increase by 5 to 10 percent without causing a population decline. Meaning they could have a hunting and trapping season to manage The population that is above population goals but they don’t. In their management plan I found no mention of civilian control of population at all. Curious as they admitted to having multiple problems with wolf interactions. They also state the goal to manage wolves like other game animals in the state but they are not doing that. So they are not even sticking to their own management plan. Montana and Idaho have stable wolf populations even with hunting and trapping. So why not include that as a management plan for a species that is 3x above its population numbers?

And what about Zebra in Africa? Mule Deer are an entirely different conversation.

Wenaha has had a large elk MO for a long time, it doesn't mean the herd is unhealthy, it means there is a Management objective for where they would like the herd to be, depending on many situations. Quality hunting opportunity, land owner complaints, over browsing sensitive habitat, etc. Wenaha used to have a pretty lousy elk population way back when...decades before the wolves. It has been increasing steadily.

Please, what are your thoughts on increasing elk populations in those 3 units with wolf populations? What are your thoughts on Idahos current elk population compared to the 1995 elk population when wolves were reintroduced. And what are your thoughts on record levels of elk harvest in Idaho - "For the sixth straight year, Idaho elk hunters harvested more than 20,000 elk, good for the second best stretch in the state's history"? Don't dodge me. Let's have a discussion.

I’m sorry I guess I didn’t realize that wolves don’t eat mule deer. I said it before and I’ll tell you again. Harvest numbers are not scientific. They are based on self reporting by hunters. There are a bunch of factors that can increase harvest numbers. License sales increase, better opportunity because of elk being pressured into more accessible areas. Let’s look at the actual data from ODFW. Did you notice that the bull and calf to cow ratios are down? Meaning that the weakest members are being picked off creating a different herd dynamic. Again do you believe that mule deer fawns had a 100% survival rate in walla walla for 5 straight years? ODFW does. Why are you dodging me on the population numbers of wolves and their management objective? It clearly states they have 158 wolves and their objective is 48-49. Are we talking about IDaho or Oregon or Colorado? You want to talk data but then dismiss other data put forth from the same source. I asked you about scientists asking for a natural migration of wolves into Colorado instead of a forced introduction and.... it would seem you are dodging me not vice versa. Idaho also manages its populations and has a steady population of wolves. Pregón admits to having more wolves than their objective but doesn’t touch them. Did you even read the management plan??

 

Platensek you can’t argue with a fool and win. You are spot on and are arguing for wolf management not elimination. He just proved your point with his Idaho success rates 1994 30000 elk harvested. 1995 wolves planted and left largely unmanaged for 15 years and harvest success in 2011 is 15000 a 50 percent decrease. Aggressive wolf management for 10 years we are back to 20000. He made your point that both predators and prey have to be managed. Ask him to show the elk populations every year since wolves in Idaho and you will see similar story but the real answer there is WHERE the elk are. Traditional greatest habitat for elk in Idaho our wilderness areas have had elk populations decimated. A lot of elk are in town now or crowded on ag land due to wolf pressure in the high country.

That’s all I really want. I want wolves on the landscape and I want them managed correctly. Seems to me every time someone suggests that wolves be managed someone says no because of feelings and not facts. I don’t know if Oregon and Washington are at the same level as Idaho or Montana yet but they have populations that could be managed and allowing hunters to participate in that management would do wonders for everyone but die hard wolf lovers.

Hydro proved your point for you with his fancy Idaho graphs 

[brew]

Hey everyone has their own opinions but what bothers me the most is the personal attacks on Hydro and even the owner of the site calling him names--that just incites the crowd.  You want to have a conversation that's fine but lets be adults

[idahohuntr]

Hey everyone has their own opinions but what bothers me the most is the personal attacks on Hydro and even the owner of the site calling him names--that just incites the crowd.  You want to have a conversation that's fine but lets be adults

A lot more productive discussion can happen if we all focus on the topic and not the people. 

Platensek-po I appreciate the dialogue you and hydro have had...largely respectful and focused on the topic without a bunch of unnecessary attacks - even though there is strong disagreement.  I've learned a bit from your exchanges and I appreciate points you both have made. 

[KFhunter]

From what I'm seeing in Idaho,  hunting and trapping wolves alone isn't enough. 

You can get 30 tags this year for the 20-21 season,  so why have tags?  Just do coyote rules. 

They keep increasing them because they aren't keeping up. 


https://idfg.idaho.gov/press/fg-commission-increases-number-wolf-tags-hunters-and-trappers-can-purchase#:~:text=23%2C%20the%20Idaho%20Fish%20and,and%20trapping%20seasons%20and%20rules.

Hunting harvest rates on gray wolves are generally very low. In 2019, more than 45,000 wolf tags were sold in Idaho, and hunters harvested 188 wolves — a success rate of 0.4 percent.

I told ya'll this years ago here on HW.  Hunting and Trapping aren't good enough!    With such low harvest rates there's NO REASON for WDFW to not allow hunting! 
and we can't even trap the things here

Hunting Won't make a dent!

[Skyvalhunter]

So in a state like Idaho was the only additional way they got rid of them in the past by poison?

[nwwanderer]

And a huge pile of federal $ and a great deal of time. Check the federal record.  Give them the same status as a coyote they will be fine.

[idaho guy]

Hydro it’s interesting that you chose 2004 elk populations in Wyoming as your starting point. I think you just proved the point that aggressive wolf management does help elk populations yet again. 2004 would have been at lest 9 years of unmanaged wolves. Wyoming plan was approved a few years after Idaho I think. I don’t know there wolf season exactly but I’m pretty sure much of Wyoming wolves are treated like coyotes shoot on sight no season or limits. Back to the original post why introduce wolves into Colorado when they were already migrating their anyways. You have stats from 2 states showing there almost impossible to manage with even year round seasons. Why introduce something that was already there ? Thanks again for googling all that evidence on why aggressive wolf management has helped the herds of Wyoming and Idaho. Idaho is fine our elk will be ok because where I live we have a year around season on private land, 30 tags per year AND a $1000 bounty on them. Our fish and game sees enough damage to elk that they have spent money to HIRE sharpshooters to shoot wolves from helicopters. Why is it a great idea to spend tax payer money dumping more wolves in Colorado when they are already there ?

[idaho guy]

Hey everyone has their own opinions but what bothers me the most is the personal attacks on Hydro and even the owner of the site calling him names--that just incites the crowd.  You want to have a conversation that's fine but lets be adults

A lot more productive discussion can happen if we all focus on the topic and not the people. 

Platensek-po I appreciate the dialogue you and hydro have had...largely respectful and focused on the topic without a bunch of unnecessary attacks - even though there is strong disagreement.  I've learned a bit from your exchanges and I appreciate points you both have made.

 

I know you think uniformed citizens should vote on these issues. Let’s not debate that again. Do you think spending tax payer money to dump wolves in Colorado where they are migrating naturally is a good idea? Regardless of wether the owners(the public) have the right to decide is this a good idea? Or a total dumpster fire decision by Colorado

[idahohuntr]

Hey everyone has their own opinions but what bothers me the most is the personal attacks on Hydro and even the owner of the site calling him names--that just incites the crowd.  You want to have a conversation that's fine but lets be adults

A lot more productive discussion can happen if we all focus on the topic and not the people. 

Platensek-po I appreciate the dialogue you and hydro have had...largely respectful and focused on the topic without a bunch of unnecessary attacks - even though there is strong disagreement.  I've learned a bit from your exchanges and I appreciate points you both have made.

 

I know you think uniformed citizens should vote on these issues. Let’s not debate that again. Do you think spending tax payer money to dump wolves in Colorado where they are migrating naturally is a good idea? Regardless of wether the owners(the public) have the right to decide is this a good idea? Or a total dumpster fire decision by Colorado

No, I would not have voted for this initiative were I a CO resident, primarily for 2 reasons already mentioned: 1. wolves are already in CO, so like WA, just leave it to whatever naturally colonizes.  2. It does create a significant resource drain - biologists and staff working on mule deer and CWD and other important issues are going to get sucked into the same wolf bs you see WDFW sucked into. 

If I were advising policy makers in western CO I would be torn over how to handle this from a strategic standpoint.  Do you stall, delay, seek another initiative to overturn this one (given it was such a close vote). sue under ESA and NEPA and try to stop it from ultimately happening...or, given the current political makeup, do you move quickly to establish and codify hunting seasons, depredation plans etc. that allow for more successful management in the future.  CO is a purple state, trending blue.  In a decade they may be solid blue like WA and at that time they will be in the same boat as WA...no chance for any hunting seasons or substantive lethal control measures.

If wolves are ultimately reintroduced I expect it will be similar to all the other western states.  The impacts and distribution of wolves will be variable, some areas (particularly NW Colorado) are likely to have the greatest concentration of wolves, and how this will impact ungulate herds will be a function of many other variables as well.  It will not 'destroy' deer and elk hunting by any stretch, but it will have impacts on game numbers, distribution, and behavior.
 

[KFhunter]

"If wolves are ultimately reintroduced I expect it will be similar to all the other western states"

So you admit WA wolves were planted!


😆 🤣


And you admit CO already has wolves


But for some reason hasn't taken off like in all other western states (where wolves were introduced) *

*except WA (where they "weren't introduced" of course) just a big anomaly 



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk