Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Items that do not fit the categories above.
Forum rules
Please do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website. For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
Locked

Should wolves be reintroduced into the mountains in Colorado?

Yes
128
51%
No
101
41%
Undecided
20
8%
 
Total votes: 249
GK83
Posts: 20
Joined: 12/27/2010
14ers:summits9 
13ers:summits22 

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by GK83 » Mon Oct 26, 2020 11:59 am

While I'm sure I won't change anyone's mind I feel like at least some of the misinformation in the last couple of pages should be rebutted...

First things first, I hunt, in many places, both with and without wolves, I like wolves and wouldn't mind seeing them in CO, and I don't think that they would be the end of big game hunting in CO...
that said, ballot box biology has never had a great result long term, when biologist recommend against something and advocates ram it down their throats by virtue of popular opinion from a bunch of people who don't understand the issue it leaves a bad taste in my mouth even if I agree that something should happen, there's also the funding issue, I really dislike the CPW being tasked to pay for this, It's essentially a blank check coming out of the pockets of hunters and anglers, who already subsidize parks, boat ramps, many things that have nothing to do with their intended activities.

some things to note from comments on the last couple of pages.
1. I'm 100% sure that wolves will thrive in CO, the more dense population of humans Isn't a bad thing for them, it just means that there is a more robust population to keep management tied up in court.

2. "undoing it" by killing all the wolves won't happen, once the states in the GYE got management authority they all pretty much immediately tried to reduce populations, as it turns out wolves are smart and quite hard to kill, despite more or less unlimited hunting in most of the reintroduction area pack size keeps climbing, it would appear that to extirpate wolves again would be next to impossible given modern feelings on the tactics used the first time.

3. CO's political climate would guarantee that it was a decade at least before wolves were managed if they ever are, this is pretty tough on the CPW to try and maintain it's management of deer, elk, moose, sheep, etc when it isn't allowed to manage predation, the argument that this returns us to a more natural ecosystem doesn't hold water, for anyone wondering we exist in a highly managed ecosystem that doesn't have much to do with a truly wild world anymore, with private property, human encroachment to migration corridors and wintering areas and other disturbances to wildlife management is necessary if we want to keep viable populations of game animals in a lot of areas, let nature take care of itself as lots of people seem to want these days and before long there would be little wildlife...

4. I agree that wolves in Yellowstone have greatly improved the habitat, increased the health of game herds, helped vegetation, pretty much everything advertised, however, it should be noted that Yellowstone is another artificial ecosystem, there was no population control on elk for decades, they were wildly overpopulated and in that case, wolves were a great solution for a problem, however, outside the park pretty much no habitat improvements have happened, elk simply aren't the same problem where they are managed for sustainable numbers by hunting...

5. the elk herds in SW CO where the proposed reintroduction will happen aren't overpopulated, on the contrary, despite CPW not actually counting elk in years in these areas they are aware enough of the declining herd and low calf recruitment that they keep cutting down hunting licenses and are trying to figure out what is happening to the herd, while it has been proven by the northern reintroduction that long term wolves don't decimate elk herds they do have a huge impact the first decade or so while prey animals adapted for generations to not have such predators around readjust behavior.

6. not counting all of the above it seems that biologists are concerned about genetic swamping of the slowly recovering Mexican Gray wolf population, to me, this seems like it should be brought up more? we are introducing a species that is by no means endangered that very well might extirpate a species that is native and very endangered? it's tough to find good info on this but it seems that the biologist working on Mexican Grey recovery are pretty universally against the reintroduction... that gives me pause that they are being marginalized.

FWIW, I think it's nearly impossible to find a source for most info that you dig up on this that is objective, my opinions are the result of really trying to understand both sides of this and have an informed view, I'm sure that 5 minutes on google and everyone can have an article that disputes anything I say, from both sides probably, this is just to urge everyone to put a little more effort into understanding the issue before you vote on feelings.
User avatar
nyker
Posts: 2442
Joined: 12/6/2007
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits22 
Trip Reports (69)

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by nyker » Mon Oct 26, 2020 12:45 pm

You raise good points, and similarly valid in New York/Adirondacks with the wolf debate, just substitute deer for elk...
User avatar
nyker
Posts: 2442
Joined: 12/6/2007
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits22 
Trip Reports (69)

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by nyker » Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:27 pm

So.. is the verdict in yet?
PJ88
Posts: 42
Joined: 5/11/2020
14ers:summits17 
13ers:summits5 

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by PJ88 » Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:30 pm

Yes
1,437,207 50.2%
No
1,428,405 49.8%

Updated: 21 minutes ago
87% reporting

This is reallllyyyy close.
User avatar
nyker
Posts: 2442
Joined: 12/6/2007
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits22 
Trip Reports (69)

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by nyker » Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:06 pm

hmm, lot of close races today
User avatar
montanahiker
Posts: 154
Joined: 8/30/2015
14ers:summits27 
13ers:summits100 

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by montanahiker » Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:39 pm

YES
1,437,528
50.1%

NO
1,429,173
49.9%

Updated: 3 minutes ago
87% reporting

I wonder which precincts make up the last 13%.
"Mountains are not stadiums where I satisfy my ambition to achieve, they are the cathedrals where I practice my religion. From their lofty summits I view my past, dream of the future and, with an unusual acuity, am allowed to experience the present moment. On each journey I am reborn." - Anatoli Boukreev
User avatar
stephakett
Posts: 709
Joined: 5/30/2014
14ers:summits28 
13ers:summits34 
Trip Reports (1)
Contact:

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by stephakett » Wed Nov 04, 2020 5:20 pm

montanahiker wrote:
Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:39 pm
YES
1,437,528
50.1%

NO
1,429,173
49.9%

Updated: 3 minutes ago
87% reporting

I wonder which precincts make up the last 13%.
WOW. :shock: that is a close race.
“My father considered a walk among the mountains as the equivalent of churchgoing.” (Aldous Huxley)
User avatar
LURE
Posts: 1200
Joined: 6/28/2011
14ers:summits32 
13ers:summits11 

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by LURE » Thu Nov 05, 2020 8:08 am

quite shocked. i thought it would be a relative blow out

automatic recount territory if things don't change much, no?
User avatar
SurfNTurf
Posts: 1871
Joined: 8/20/2009
14ers:summits58 winter26 
13ers:summits109 winter9 
Trip Reports (47)
Contact:

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by SurfNTurf » Thu Nov 05, 2020 10:52 am

I was expecting something in the realm of 65% for, similar to Prop 115. Definitely a shock. I've talked to a lot of "no" voters one-on-one the past few days to try to understand, and combined with the replies on this thread, unfortunately it does seem that the anti-wolf propaganda was very effective. I'm not a huge radio or cable guy, but anecdotally it felt like the anti-wolf ads (largely fueled by dark money donors from out of state) were far more prevalent than pro-wolf ads based on my limited exposure.

Several outdoorspeople I know voted against because they are afraid of encountering wolves in the wild, which is verifiably baseless. Wolves simply don't attack humans. Statistically, a cow is more likely to kill you on the trail. A cow. The other most common argument I've encountered is that "they're already here" and thus Prop 114 is a waste of money, which was pushed heavily by the anti-wolf campaign. It's also not true. The only verified pack, a small group that moved into northern Colorado only just this year, had three members shot and killed mere weeks before the election. That news of those killings wasn't covered nearly as much as when the pack was first verified, which led to a lot of unintended voter ignorance. Many people filled out their ballots assuming that pack still existed.

I read last night somewhere that an automatic recount is triggered if the final count ends up within a margin of 7-8,000 votes. The anti-wolf groups are already pushing for it, whether or not the final tally is within that range. Even if Prop 114 passed in a landslide, it was always destined to get tied up in litigation. Let the court battles begin.

Not to sound all Q-Anony here, but if you're confused by this issue or dead-set against it, I'd encourage you to read and research the topic a bit more on your own. Our understanding of wolves has changed a lot in the past 40-50 years. Many anti-wolf sentiments are rooted in stories and ideas that were proven false decades ago. Pro-wolf literature can get a little touchy-feely and anthropomorphic, but here are some good reading suggestions that at least attempt to cover the issue from multiple angles:

Of Wolves and Men by Barry Lopez (start here!)
American Wolf by Nate Blakeslee
The Rise of Wolf 8 by Rick McIntyre (verges on anthropomorphism, but it's written by a guy who's spent more hours watching wolves in the wild than anyone else alive)
“There are two kinds of climbers: those who climb because their heart sings when they’re in the mountains, and all the rest.” - Alex Lowe

"There have been joys too great to describe in words, and there have been griefs upon which I cannot dare to dwell; and with those in mind I say, 'Climb if you will, but remember that courage and strength are nought without prudence, and that a momentary negligence may destroy the happiness of a lifetime. Do nothing in haste, look well to each step, and from the beginning think what may be the end.'" - Edward Whymper
User avatar
LURE
Posts: 1200
Joined: 6/28/2011
14ers:summits32 
13ers:summits11 

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by LURE » Thu Nov 05, 2020 11:21 am

SurfNTurf wrote:
Thu Nov 05, 2020 10:52 am
it felt like the anti-wolf ads (largely fueled by dark money donors from out of state) were far more prevalent than pro-wolf ads based on my limited exposure.
lol

as if the pro wolf ads are from in state

the proposition itself originated with a group in DC, like anything ever does anymore

the pro and anti arguments are absurd across the board for the most part, your bias is showing hard here. which all is irrelevant because election day is pushing two days ago
User avatar
mtree
Posts: 1058
Joined: 6/16/2010
14ers: List not added

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by mtree » Thu Nov 05, 2020 11:47 am

I voted against it for one simple reason. I don't think spending oogles of money is in the best interest of anyone... other than those employed by the wolf reintroduction effort.

The wolves are already in Colorado and their population will grow on their own. That's like spending money on groceries you already have.
- I didn't say it was your fault. I said I was blaming you.
User avatar
montanahiker
Posts: 154
Joined: 8/30/2015
14ers:summits27 
13ers:summits100 

Re: Ballot for Reintroduction of Wolves

Post by montanahiker » Thu Nov 05, 2020 11:48 am

SurfNTurf wrote:
Thu Nov 05, 2020 10:52 am
I'm not a huge radio or cable guy, but anecdotally it felt like the anti-wolf ads (largely fueled by dark money donors from out of state) were far more prevalent than pro-wolf ads based on my limited exposure.
According to ballotpedia.org: "The campaign supporting the initiative had raised $2.28 million in contributions. Opponents of the initiative had raised $871,110." - https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Propos ... ive_(2020)

The top funders against were the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and the Colorado Farm Bureau.
The top funders for the supporters were Richard Pritzlaff (AZ), Tides Center (CA), Defenders of Wildlife, Tim Ferriss (TX).

The only ad I saw against reintroduction mentioned that CPW has regularly opposed reintroducing wolves. I don't know the story there but if we're supposed to follow the "experts" on everything it sounds like they think it's a bad idea. But hey, if you can get out of state people and organizations to convince voters on the Front Range that won't be impacted by the issue (compared to the local communities) to vote yes then I guess you win.
"Mountains are not stadiums where I satisfy my ambition to achieve, they are the cathedrals where I practice my religion. From their lofty summits I view my past, dream of the future and, with an unusual acuity, am allowed to experience the present moment. On each journey I am reborn." - Anatoli Boukreev
Locked