Wolf reintroduction in Colorado
- Thread starter gnwatts
- Start date
- Joined
- May 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,017
With all due respect, I don't see how you can love wolves and call them amazing, then say they don't belong here. Your comments match the ones from the ranchers in attendance, verbatim.
1. As far as the impact on ranching, see posts above.
2. Population density in Colorado is on the east side of the front range. You live in Fruita, last time I checked there was very little density, between you and the Utah border, north and south, and east to the front range, and then from the front range to Kansas and Nebraska. See map below.
3. How will wolves negatively affect tourism? Hunting is probably what you are referring to. Elk and deer populations have either increased or stabilized in the areas that have reintroduced the wolf.
From the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife:
What has been learned from the other Northern Rocky Mountain States?
Elk are a prime food source for wolves. While wolves are impacting elk in a few hunting districts, these are the minority, as elk populations throughout the tri-state area (Idaho, Montana and Wyoming) remain high: According to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, wolves are probably affecting hunting in some places, but there are no clear answers that apply across the board. Different combinations and densities of predator and prey species, terrain, vegetation, climate, land ownership patterns, and land uses result in different opportunities for hunters
While changes in elk behavior may create a more challenging hunting experience (for wolves as well as people!), elk populations throughout the region remain high.
1. As far as the impact on ranching, see posts above.
2. Population density in Colorado is on the east side of the front range. You live in Fruita, last time I checked there was very little density, between you and the Utah border, north and south, and east to the front range, and then from the front range to Kansas and Nebraska. See map below.
3. How will wolves negatively affect tourism? Hunting is probably what you are referring to. Elk and deer populations have either increased or stabilized in the areas that have reintroduced the wolf.
From the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife:
What has been learned from the other Northern Rocky Mountain States?
Elk are a prime food source for wolves. While wolves are impacting elk in a few hunting districts, these are the minority, as elk populations throughout the tri-state area (Idaho, Montana and Wyoming) remain high: According to Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, wolves are probably affecting hunting in some places, but there are no clear answers that apply across the board. Different combinations and densities of predator and prey species, terrain, vegetation, climate, land ownership patterns, and land uses result in different opportunities for hunters
While changes in elk behavior may create a more challenging hunting experience (for wolves as well as people!), elk populations throughout the region remain high.
- Wyoming: 120,000 elk estimated statewide, 50 percent above objective; the state of Wyoming continues to manage for a reduction in elk population.
- Montana: 150,000 elk estimated statewide, 14 percent over objective. Montana has the second highest elk population of any state.
- Idaho: Estimated population: 101,100, slightly below objective; 23 of the state's 29 game management zones have elk numbers within targets or above.
Last edited:
Tess
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2014
- Messages
- 13
I hadn't previously heard much about the wolf issue but this link addressed the few things I had heard and more--even the "superwolf theory." It's nice learning to understand this issue better.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
- Messages
- 2,086
Ramble Alert!
In my opinion, sometimes humble, sometime not, there are very few things the modern human can experience as awesome as the wolf howl. I prefer listening to the howl over an actual sighting although I have been fortunate to have experienced both a lot. For me the only thing that rivals it is the elk bugle. It just grabs me somewhere deep and reminds me that I am truly fortunate to live with such wild country. Just ask any person from Japan or western Europe.
This is an extremely complex topic, too complex for my pea-brain at times but I support re-introducing them to Colorado. They will create big changes in elk numbers and habits, which to an ecologist/biologist will be a good thing. To many others it will not.
I do recommend to those in charge to tread lightly and go slowly. Be extremely thorough. The original wolf re-introduction plan for Yellowstone and the northern Rockies has been decimated by lawsuits, some good, some frivolous. I lived in Idaho and Montana during the planning/scoping and re-introduction phase. I whole-heartedly supported the re-introduction and I still do.
I also regarded the re-introduction plan as a promise to all involved that viable wolf populations would be re-established but that populations would be managed by the states (hunting) as soon as population goals were met. There were a lot of concessions made to appease the ranching industry as well as other industries potentially affected by the re-introduction. That has turned into a legal quagmire. The courts are deciding the management goals, not the biologists.
I have been visiting Yellowstone regularly since 1982. I still backpack there every year and yes, things have changed dramatically, especially with the northern herd of elk, since the wolf re-introduction. Depending on which scientist you believe, wolves either have or have not caused the decline in elk numbers in Yellowstone. Who knows for sure? It is difficult to believe that having 100 or more wolves in the park has not at least contributed to the decline in elk but all things ecological are complex.
If I were a rancher, I would be pissed to see the hunting/hunting-ban seesaw that has occurred. It took me many years of living in the Rocky Mountain region to realize that if we lose the ranching industry in the west, we will soon after lose much of our wildlife. "Cows, not condos". Having wolves as a part of the ecosystem is a great thing, no doubt. But wolf supporters have to realize there are many others who do not support that view whether for financial reasons, fear, ignorance, tradition or whatever. Their opinions count.
No matter where wolves are re-introduced in Colorado, eventually wolves will inhabit nearly all areas of the state west of I-25. I support that but many will not. The more solid the re-introduction plan is the sooner the states can manage them and attempt to keep their numbers to a socially acceptable level.
I remember a certain actress that owned a few acres in Montana in the late 80's and much of the 90's. She had a nearby pack of wolves and was fairly regularly seen on TV or in print talking about how awesome it was to have wolves so close. Then one day her golden retriever was dragged off the porch by a wolf and eaten in the yard (if I remember right). That was the last she ever spoke highly of wolves and rumor had it that she sold her property soon thereafter.
And to correct the earlier post by someone. Yes, wolves do attack and even kill humans. Extremely rare indeed but it does occur. The rarity of it is likely due more to wolves avoidance of us than our awesomeness around wolves.
http://www.adn.com/article/20111206/dna-samples-confirm-wolves-killed-southwest-alaska-teacher
Ramble Alert off. Hey I warned you.
In my opinion, sometimes humble, sometime not, there are very few things the modern human can experience as awesome as the wolf howl. I prefer listening to the howl over an actual sighting although I have been fortunate to have experienced both a lot. For me the only thing that rivals it is the elk bugle. It just grabs me somewhere deep and reminds me that I am truly fortunate to live with such wild country. Just ask any person from Japan or western Europe.
This is an extremely complex topic, too complex for my pea-brain at times but I support re-introducing them to Colorado. They will create big changes in elk numbers and habits, which to an ecologist/biologist will be a good thing. To many others it will not.
I do recommend to those in charge to tread lightly and go slowly. Be extremely thorough. The original wolf re-introduction plan for Yellowstone and the northern Rockies has been decimated by lawsuits, some good, some frivolous. I lived in Idaho and Montana during the planning/scoping and re-introduction phase. I whole-heartedly supported the re-introduction and I still do.
I also regarded the re-introduction plan as a promise to all involved that viable wolf populations would be re-established but that populations would be managed by the states (hunting) as soon as population goals were met. There were a lot of concessions made to appease the ranching industry as well as other industries potentially affected by the re-introduction. That has turned into a legal quagmire. The courts are deciding the management goals, not the biologists.
I have been visiting Yellowstone regularly since 1982. I still backpack there every year and yes, things have changed dramatically, especially with the northern herd of elk, since the wolf re-introduction. Depending on which scientist you believe, wolves either have or have not caused the decline in elk numbers in Yellowstone. Who knows for sure? It is difficult to believe that having 100 or more wolves in the park has not at least contributed to the decline in elk but all things ecological are complex.
If I were a rancher, I would be pissed to see the hunting/hunting-ban seesaw that has occurred. It took me many years of living in the Rocky Mountain region to realize that if we lose the ranching industry in the west, we will soon after lose much of our wildlife. "Cows, not condos". Having wolves as a part of the ecosystem is a great thing, no doubt. But wolf supporters have to realize there are many others who do not support that view whether for financial reasons, fear, ignorance, tradition or whatever. Their opinions count.
No matter where wolves are re-introduced in Colorado, eventually wolves will inhabit nearly all areas of the state west of I-25. I support that but many will not. The more solid the re-introduction plan is the sooner the states can manage them and attempt to keep their numbers to a socially acceptable level.
I remember a certain actress that owned a few acres in Montana in the late 80's and much of the 90's. She had a nearby pack of wolves and was fairly regularly seen on TV or in print talking about how awesome it was to have wolves so close. Then one day her golden retriever was dragged off the porch by a wolf and eaten in the yard (if I remember right). That was the last she ever spoke highly of wolves and rumor had it that she sold her property soon thereafter.
And to correct the earlier post by someone. Yes, wolves do attack and even kill humans. Extremely rare indeed but it does occur. The rarity of it is likely due more to wolves avoidance of us than our awesomeness around wolves.
http://www.adn.com/article/20111206/dna-samples-confirm-wolves-killed-southwest-alaska-teacher
Ramble Alert off. Hey I warned you.
- Joined
- May 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,017
Thanks for your post. If you were referring to my post about wolf killing humans, I said that there has not been a confirmed human death in the Continental U.S. since 1888. I did not refer to all of North America.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
- Messages
- 2,086
I stand corrected. Thanks gnwatts.
Don't like ads? Become a BCP Supporting Member and kiss them all goodbye. Click here for more info.