This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
onebyone wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 11:45 am
There is one thing I can assure you, if this thing passes, it will be many years before a single wolf is reintroduced in Colorado. My guess is that we will have a breeding pack here in Colorado before any wolf is actually reintroduced and this plan will be used to manage existing wolves versus reintroducing new wolves.
And that is if it even passes.
They are going to need a plan either way no too long in the future.
technically cpw has a wolf management plan already. roundtable recommendations adopted by the commission as a resolution in 2005. I think i've posted this in this thread already: https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Wildl ... ations.pdf
i'm operating under the assumption that it's a foregone conclusion this thing passes - one quick glance at the demographics of colorado tells me that
i think the language of the initiative stipulates wolves on the ground by year three, no?
it'll be interesting how it develops. even if a pack is incontrovertibly established on it's own in that timeframe, i'm sure it will be up to the courts to decide how cpw can/will/should/or not proceed with reintroduction. thank god judges have wildlife degrees
onebyone wrote: ↑Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:41 pm
It's all in the eye of the beholder and there is a lot of propaganda pushing one view or the other. Fact is that we have a heavily managed ecosystem in Colorado, everything from the animals themselves to 4 wheelers to hikers to hunters and so on. There is no reason why wolves can't be part of our managed ecosystem. You can't say we're playing God with wolves but not with everything else.
It often comes down to self interest and what things people should take priority over other things. There really isn't a 100% right answer and it's all heavily subjective imo.
i don't like the funding mechanism of the ballot initiative, that's basically my main problem with it. i want it to come out of the general fund. if the "people" want wolves, they should pay for it. not hunters and fishermen and women.
this was one of two reasons i personally declined the initiative. our natural resource departments are underfunded as-is. until the general public is actually willing to pay for conservation efforts we do not need to further burden strained resources.
the second reason was because the wolves are already here. let's set up the funding needed ^^ to deal with the negative repercussions of wolf/human/livestock interaction so that we are better-prepared with BOTH the resources AND the public need when they arrive.
“To walk in nature is to witness a thousand miracles.” – Mary Davis
stephakett wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:47 pm
this was one of two reasons i personally declined the initiative. our natural resource departments are underfunded as-is. until the general public is actually willing to pay for conservation efforts we do not need to further burden strained resources.
the second reason was because the wolves are already here. let's set up the funding needed ^^ to deal with the negative repercussions of wolf/human/livestock interaction so that we are better-prepared with BOTH the resources AND the public need when they arrive.
i wish, hope?, there are more people in this state than i am currently predicting that think critically like you do
i wish it wasnt so dogmatic and polarizing like everything is
I don't want to wade too deeply into this thread, as I am not entirely sure how I feel about this measure myself (though I will say I disagree that hunters and fishers should foot the bill for this project). However, I've done some reading on this, and it seems like there is some skepticism that packs that migrate here will be able sustain and grow in numbers. Part of the issue is the legal status of wolves between Colorado (where they are protected by the Endangered Species Act), and Wyoming (where you can kill them without a permit). If they wander back north, they can be shot on sight, which may have already happened to some of the pack in Moffat County.
I don't stand firmly one way or another on this, but I think their chance at reestablishing themselves seems relatively slim.
Cygnus X1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:10 am
These are statewide population per square mile numbers -
Wyoming - 6.0
Montana - 6.8
Idaho - 19.8
Colorado - 55
Oregon - 35.6
Arizona - 45.2
Washington - 101.2
All of these states are now home to wolf populations, and have higher population densities than the ones you mentioned.
Also, wolves and grizzlies have been able to recover in much of Europe, which has far higher population density than Colorado: https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/929104.Chapron_2014.pdf
Cygnus X1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 10:10 am
These are statewide population per square mile numbers -
Wyoming - 6.0
Montana - 6.8
Idaho - 19.8
Colorado - 55
Oregon - 35.6
Arizona - 45.2
Washington - 101.2
All of these states are now home to wolf populations, and have higher population densities than the ones you mentioned.
Also, wolves and grizzlies have been able to recover in much of Europe, which has far higher population density than Colorado: https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/929104.Chapron_2014.pdf
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.
