TarponChaser said:

---

Y'all thing this stuff over wolves is getting testy you should check out the debates over efforts in the west to extirpate rainbow trout and brown trout from the waters in favor of native trout like bull trout and the various strains of cut-throats. Rainbows are introduced in virtually all of their North American range as they're native only to the Pacific Coast west of the Sierra Nevadas and Brown trout were introduced in America from their native Germany in 1883.

There's a whole lot of people out there who think rainbows and browns should be exterminated throughout the Rockies in order to restore native populations.

---

I strongly dislike people.

TarponChaser said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

Man oh man... had no idea. What if somebody thinks we don't need the Florida strain of largemouth in Texas? What a mess on all accounts.

---

We can hijack that into another thread, though there doesn't seem to be any appetite for that. Now, talk about exterminating smallies in Texas rivers to restore Guadalupe bass populations and it's another story.

---

It really speaks to the whole "return to native" ideology. There are some things that man's intervention has improved. We have made some wild places better. Better for wildlife and better for humans. Returning to "native" just for sake a picking a time period and returning to it, isn't necessarily always the best idea.

Sadly this kinda stuff is only getting to get worse I'm afraid. When we have folks that know nothing but concrete and steel and only set foot in the wild as a " destination weekend" making policy.... well...

Roger that.

96ags said:

---

TarponChaser said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

Man oh man... had no idea. What if somebody thinks we don't need the Florida strain of largemouth in Texas? What a mess on all accounts.

---

We can hijack that into another thread, though there doesn't seem to be any appetite for that. Now, talk about exterminating smallies in Texas rivers to restore Guadalupe bass populations and it's another story.

---

It really speaks to the whole "return to native" ideology. There are some things that man's intervention has improved. We have made some wild places better. Better for wildlife and better for humans. Returning to "native" just for sake a picking a time period and returning to it, isn't necessarily always the best idea.

---

I actually think there's a legitimate debate on the trout matter because rainbows and brown have really harmed the native trout populations. It's not like there weren't trout in these waters before they were just different.

I'm not a trout guy but why is it good to have rainbows & browns instead of native cutthroats?

I side with you. If you can't stop it, hopefully you can shape the program as best as possible. Good luck to you.

If they're going to reintroduce a predator, make it something cool like a pack of hyenas.

I think wolves are pretty cool….

JustPanda said:

---

I think wolves are pretty cool….

---

I dunno, I think most of the OB likes Cougars better.

I work in Vail, I see enough cougars.

https://www.vaildaily.com/news/cpw-strikes-public-hunting-reference-from-wolf-plan-ahead-of-anticipated-may-approval/

https://www.9news.com/article/life/animals/colorado-wolf-attacks-dogs-killed-north-park-jackson-county/73-14991072-86bd-4d9b-af99-21dc0579aed1

Update: the wolves didn't wait for Colorado to start reintroducing them and they don't seem to care that they aren't supposed to be east of the continental divide, which is where Walden is. If you have a soft spot for good dogs the video might not be for you. I feel for their owners, I'll bet they didn't vote for reintroduction.

I used to know two guys in Idaho that loved to hunt lions with dogs. They both separately recounted instances of wolves killing their lion dogs once their dogs had gotten far enough out from them.

Gunny456 said:

---

Understand your opinion and respect it.
For discussion sake, how do we look at hogs then...... non evasive or evasive?

---

They become pretty damn evasive once you start shooting at them...

McInnis said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Pretty simple: put A pack on public land, manage it for size…

In the end, it might not be practical.

---

Managing a wolf population for size really isn't so simple. States aren't allowed to do that without strict federal oversight. In Wyoming for example, the state Game and Fish dept isn't allowed to set a quota for wolf kill and if that's exceeded for a year, then to simply reduce the quota by that amount the following year as they would do with other game. If the quota is exceeded by even one wolf there's hell to pay.

So if you buy a wolf tag you have to check in with Game and Fish every morning to ensure the quota hasn't been exceeded. But the wolves are smart enough to live out of cell phone service. It took Wyoming about ten years to finally get a wolf season approved by the federal courts.

---

And it's a lot harder when this population cross State lines, which is a certainty. Like someone else said, they are really bad at reading boundary markers. It's not like you can put them in a high fenced 100 mile pen, and monitor the population.

I was reading about this recently, and read that the original ballot provisions (that were approved) didnt specify anything about regulating the size/population of the wolves. So what is the ideal size? What areas are out of bounds? What are considered negative effects (ie. depleting another species population), and what are the measures to maintain those, once they're breached? This exercise doesnt seem to have been planned fully.

Btw- Good discussion about this on Rogan's podcast a week or two ago.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/18YM5V5n5C2YnabRjriWz9

Not only is it not planned fully- it doesn't seem to be planned at all as far as practical application. I never saw demonstrable evidence on the benefits, repercussions, or sustainability- nor a proposed actionable plan as part of the ballot- other than forcing DOW to come up with a plan and reintroduce the wolves.

At the last meeting, the numbers floated around were between 200-750. They kept dodging the way to manage the population and the ideal number. Wolf advocates want as high of a population as possible of course, but the management of them is unclear at best. Right now the focus is the reintroduction by end of year.

Reminds me of , You have to pass it to know what's in it" type of deal.

Just my .02

https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/this-is-family-wolves-kill-two-dogs-in-northern-colorado/

Didn't want to start a new thread, but on the subject of people out west not knowing what predators might be around them…
I am watching the Utah Valley State basketball game tonight, and they are called the wolverines. I am thinking to myself why? Wolverines are only native to areas Yellowstone and north as far as I know. So being the nerd I am I look it up…turns out it was part of their historical range maybe, so an homage I guess. Cool.
But as I keep reading, apparently they have been a few sightings over the years, and last year the state authorities actually caught and collared one. It travelled something like 214 miles in the first 3 weeks of tracking.
So sports educate .

https://ksltv.com/486832/utah-dwr-captures-collars-and-releases-wolverine-only-8th-confirmed-sighting-since-1979/

I wasn't aware of the larger context of this whole thing. I have a cousin that started a non-profit (Mattersville) that keeps wolves/hybrids and is dedicated to getting vets to spend time with them.

oragator said:

---

Didn't want to start a new thread, but on the subject of people out west not knowing what predators might be around them…
I am watching the Utah Valley State basketball game tonight, and they are called the wolverines. I am thinking to myself why? Wolverines are only native to areas Yellowstone and north as far as I know. So being the nerd I am I look it up…turns out it was part of their historical range maybe, so an homage I guess. Cool.
But as I keep reading, apparently they have been a few sightings over the years, and last year the state authorities actually caught and collared one. It travelled something like 214 miles in the first 3 weeks of tracking.
So sports educate .

https://ksltv.com/486832/utah-dwr-captures-collars-and-releases-wolverine-only-8th-confirmed-sighting-since-1979/

---

I saw a wolverine elk hunting just north of the park in MT. It made the most terrible noise I have ever heard in my life.

There are only like 350 in the lower 48.

They have huge home range territories and are known to go on huge multi state wondering treks like your example. Venturing into Colorado and the dakotas.

Ya sightings in CO have been going up, pretty interesting to read about that.

We have hunted and fished on Q Creek many times from a family standpoint. It is about 60 miles south of Casper and about 560,000 acres.

My son had killed a big elk and they were field dressing it. He looked up and said, "Dang, that's a Wolverine. I've never seen one."

The Game Manager never looked up, "There are no wolverines up here....the badgers are bigger than those in Texas.

About a month or two later the Game Manager got a call, "We had a tracker on a wolverine and it crossed your ranch along this path. Did anyone see it?"

"Apparently someone did. He lives in Texas, Here's his number!"

A pack was spotted at Rio Blanco Lake this weekend by 2 different hiking parties. Must be another pack of wild dogs that can kill 14 cows at a time.

I really appreciate this thread. Thanks to all that have taken the time share their educated opinions. Its a very complex issue and what really brings politics into it is the idea of only introducing them on the western slope. Is there any scientific explanation for this? I would be interested in understanding. If not, it surely smells of hypocrisy and only creates further obstacles for understanding from both sides of the issue..

Hoyt Ag said:

---

A pack was spotted at Rio Blanco Lake this weekend by 2 different hiking parties. Must be another pack of wild dogs that can kill 14 cows at a time.

---

Is there any monetary compensation from the state or pro wolf groups to the ranchers that lose livestock to wolves? Imo if they pass a law reintroducing the wolves and prohibit ranchers from killing them, they should have to pay full replacement cost plus all expenses incurred by ranchers losing livestock, including working dogs.

Those who support this foolishness should have to pay for the damages done to others.

There are measures in place for this. It's an interesting debate all around. I'm not really for the reintroduction of the wolves at least in the number that they are talking about. If the wolves come back in on their own, which seems to be happening to a limited extent, than so be it.

Yeah not sure how they would ever determine if a reintroduced wolf or a border crosser killed livestock. The ranchers in the Western states operate on a very thin margin. I imagine the reintroduction of wolves will eventually drive many families out of the business and discourage future generations from continuing. Which will lead to selling and subdividing ranch land.

We have been dealing with dog attacks on our ranch and I can't imagine having state-introduced animals attacking my herd. Not sure what I would shoot first.

Cattle, essentially, do mimic a natural role - just taste better and are easier to handle.

I admit, I'd like the idea of mass migrating cattle herds, but there's no real way to pull that off.

https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/colorados-wolf-reintroduction-plan-will-allow-killing-chronically-depredating-wolves-but-wont-define-what-that-means/

schmellba99 said:

---

DG96 said:

---

zooguy96 said:

---

DG96 said:

---

Speaking on wolves specifically, I would rather humans be the predator. With regulation through hunting, ecosystems can be managed correctly. Humans have always been predators and part of the ecosystem. I think now we are aware enough to manage populations responsibly.

---

Letting things be natural is the way to go. Unfortunately, doesn't happen 99% of the time. You get a watered down "habitat" that's usually only good for humans.

---

I guess everyone's opinion of what is "natural" is going to vary. Dumping a bunch of wolves doesn't seem natural to me either. If they come back on there own sure. But they still need to be regulated I think.

---

When the sole cause of them being extirpated from a pretty large region - most of the entire western US - is solely because of the actions of man, they aren't coming back on their own without that same man recognizing mistakes were made and putting effort into bringing back a species they spent a century or more working to eradicate out of ignorance.

---

I have enjoyed reading this thread and learned a lot. Having spent many Falls in the Rocky Mountain West and have many friends and a few family in production agriculture there…I have seen many different sides of this debate.

99, I guess the one thing about this that jumps out at me is the Moral Certainty that many on the Pro-Wolf side have that, as you stated above, it's a "mistake" that has been made to remove, in this case wolves, from the system.

You are free to think that, don't get me wrong. But I dont see that as a Truth. Are cities "mistakes"? Highways? Fences? I like stable food prices (particularly beef). I like the fact that that we here feed a significant percentage of the worlds population with our surplus food production. These are not small things…they do come at a price. A real one in terms of land use and species impact.

But 99% of the species on Earth are extinct (I'm sure someone will differ that it's 97%, or whatever, OK) but there is a lot of emotion around this topic on one side and a lot of practical and substantial impact of peoples lives on the other.

I enjoy the science debate, thank you for that. But I think the morality of all of these issues is much less certain. And the people promoting the Morality of a decision are often the ones least affected by its implementation.

https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/colorado-tribe-only-wants-wolves-reintroduced-in-area-that-includes-routt-county-will-cpw-listen/

Wouod wolves lower CWD?

Bradley.Kohr.II said:

---

Wouod wolves lower CWD?

---

If hunters don't, how would wolf predation impact CWD?