On the news tonight, a group is trying to get signatures to introduce a pack of wolves (20) into Colorado, just like the 1980 introduction of wolves into Yellowstone.

I guess hunters know what that would mean to an already difficult situation of getting elk tags. My wife and I used to get elk tags every year. Then, about 10 years ago, we would only get them every other year. Now, we get a tag every three years if we're lucky. More people living (moving) in the state.

I have been applying for a bull moose tag for about (20) years now. This year, I finally drew that tag. It is basically a once in a lifetime tag. I can only imagine that wolves will love moose meat as much as we do. It is the best there is. We don't have enough moose in this state yet, like Alaska has, or some states back east. It is a very long wait for a moose tag, IF one can get one.

There is a huge difference in Yellowstone vs. a state. Hunting is not allowed in Yellowstone, as it is a national park. Also, Colorado has many ranches, recreational hikers, campers, climbers, etc. Wolves won't mix very well with the general public. Colorado is not a national park. It is a state.

I hope the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation will start a 'Stop the Wolf' campaign here. The Colorado Parks and Wildlife agency that watches the herds of all animals in the state, was asked to allow wolves by certain interest groups and the agency has already said 'No' to this idea. A group is now asking for signatures for a petition to over rule Parks & Wildlife's decision. They said they want 'the will of the people' to over rule Parks & Wildlife. What makes these people think they know more about the conservation of the game species than the agency?

If they get their way, my wife and I will probably get an elk tag once every six or ten years. We are residents. Out-of-staters will fare even worse. Does everyone remember when they wanted wolves in Yellowstone and said the numbers would have a cap? Yeah right! Look up the original numbers and what it turned into.

I hope they cannot get the signatures they need, and if they do, I hope the residents of Colorado vote it down in agreement with Colorado Parks & Wildlife, who know what wolves will do to our wildlife.

You are right you do not want them.

Probably the worst thing that could happen to your Sates wildlife.Wolves are the main reason Wisconsin is having a hard time with our Elk herd.Elk were introduced in 1995 and we make no headway with them because of wolf predation.In the meantime states without wolves are having dramatic increases in their introduced herds.Fight this tooth and nail.Make every hunting organization in your state aware of this situation.Just ask any hunter in Montana,Idaho,Wyoming,Wisconsin,Minnesota ,Michigan what they think of wolf predation on wildlife.OB

Don't forget NE Washington. Our WDFW says they did not introduce wolves into Wa. They might be right, I don't know if they did or did not but they did not stop the tribes and others from bootlegging them in. They are now beginning to cut back our hunting seasons with point restrictions and either sex harvest. We met the requirements of 15 breeding pairs and now our own biologists admit they really don't know how many we have in the 3 NE counties.

They are beginning to eat more cows and the left in Western Washington are lobbying to remove the ranchers and not the wolves. You can't even make this stuff up !!!

Wolves can "introduce themselves." That's what happened when they started swimming across the Snake River from Idaho into Oregon. No one needed to bootleg them in -- and they have spread.
That said, it is interesting to ponder whether we would have the CWD and foot-rot problems with some of our elk herds if they had had healthy wolf populations constantly cleaning up the sick and weak among them.

There is a three-letter solution to wolves.

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
There is a three-letter solution to wolves.

Amen!!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Wolves can "introduce themselves." That's what happened when they started swimming across the Snake River from Idaho into Oregon. No one needed to bootleg them in -- and they have spread.
That said, it is interesting to ponder whether we would have the CWD and foot-rot problems with some of our elk herds if they had had healthy wolf populations constantly cleaning up the sick and weak among them.

Maine has coyotes now, there was a story that the University of Maine wanted to introduce them and the legislature said no. The speculation was that it had already happened by accident and they needed cover. I dunno.

quote:

Originally posted by OLBIKER:

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
There is a three-letter solution to wolves.

Amen!!

that solution ain't the answer.
we can buy a wolf tag for 12$ over the counter it's good for 364 days.[then you buy a new one]
there is no need to sss, we pretty much have a green light to shoot them on sight.
the wolves are still here.

quote:

Originally posted by Lamar:
that solution ain't the answer.
we can buy a wolf tag for 12$ over the counter it's good for 364 days.[then you buy a new one]
there is no need to sss, we pretty much have a green light to shoot them on sight.
the wolves are still here.

We are not allowed to shot them here.I guess we have to wish them away.

quote:

Originally posted by Lamar:
that solution ain't the answer.
we can buy a wolf tag for 12$ over the counter it's good for 364 days.[then you buy a new one]
there is no need to sss, we pretty much have a green light to shoot them on sight.
the wolves are still here.

With the proper incentive one can hunt and trap wolves away.

It was done before and could be done again,

Sport hunting isn't how you do it.

Wolves Suck!

quote:

Originally posted by don444:
Wolves Suck!

No, if intelligent management was allowed to prevail, they'd make a great Game species.

Grizz

Bill,
I don't know of any state that is over populated with elk, therefore I see little chance of CWD in elk, and foot rot is not passed on from one to another, it comes from standin mud, water and snow, and in wildlife it pretty much cures itself in most cases, depending on the severity.

Wolves have taken over Idaho, and the elk have suffered greatly, and a large population have moved out into the desert and seem to be doing quite well.....According to Idaho Fish and Game the wolves are killing Lions, and that is true, as they will if they can catch a Lion out in the flats or sage...Its apparent that more wolves where released than record show and they are moving in all directions as the game is culled..

Beliveing that preditors kill the weak and sick is Liberal propaganda, the Bambi syndrome, its just not true...A Lion or wolf is the best judge of good meat in the world, they kill the fattest healthiest animal available..During the deer rut on my ranch that had many Mule deer, the lions would smell the big bucks rutting and kill them, I found many old carcases and fresh kills during the rut and all were mature bucks..Im sure wolves will do the same and have seen it on TV, wherein the killed large bull elk. Its just a shame that some idiot that lives in Washington DC and lives in a hightower apt. with a his pet cats can get such legislation past..To start with Idaho originally had a small gray wolf, not the huge Alaskan wolf the turned loose on us..

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
...healthy wolf populations constantly cleaning up the sick and weak among them.

I am so sick of hearing this liberal BS!

First of all, there are only so many "sick" elk running around in the woods. The wolves quickly kill them, then they go after the rest of the healthy animals in the herds.

Elk and moose have a much harder time getting around in the winter in the deep snow than the wolves, so even very healthy animals are easy prey for the wolves.

During elk and moose calving season, the cows and first born calves are very easy prey to wolves.

The introduced wolves in Yellowstone Park have almost completely wiped out all of the moose in and around the northern Yellowstone area.

There was a good reason our forefathers eliminated the wolves!

Colorado probably has the largest elk population in the world. Introducing wolves there would quickly end that.

quote:

Originally posted by buffybr:

Colorado probably has the largest elk population in the world. Introducing wolves there would quickly end that.

And THAT is a win, win for the Gun hating Commiecrats. I despise the bastards. It's probably going to happen sooner or later. The educated idiots have taken over Colorado.

Wolves have been in Colorado for over 10 years already. No news here, move along. You just haven't been told about them.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Wolves have been in Colorado for over 10 years already. No news here, move along. You just haven't been told about them.

That's interesting. I've been hunting here in Colorado for many years and have never heard of this before.

Can you quote a source of this information? I would suppose a wolf or two may have crept into our boarders, and if not yet, probably some day will. But in what numbers are you presenting and by whose observations?

I'm not saying you are wrong. I'd just like some data so I can be educated.

Thanks!

quote:

Originally posted by buffybr:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
...healthy wolf populations constantly cleaning up the sick and weak among them.

I am so sick of hearing this liberal BS!

First of all, there are only so many "sick" elk running around in the woods. The wolves quickly kill them, then they go after the rest of the healthy animals in the herds.

Elk and moose have a much harder time getting around in the winter in the deep snow than the wolves, so even very healthy animals are easy prey for the wolves.

During elk and moose calving season, the cows and first born calves are very easy prey to wolves.

The introduced wolves in Yellowstone Park have almost completely wiped out all of the moose in and around the northern Yellowstone area.

There was a good reason our forefathers eliminated the wolves!

Colorado probably has the largest elk population in the world. Introducing wolves there would quickly end that.

Exactly!

I see you are from Montana and therefore have seen the destruction first hand!

I hate to break the news to the liberals but wolves not only kill the sick and afflicted but also sport kill!

I have no use for them in the west!

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Wolves have been in Colorado for over 10 years already. No news here, move along. You just haven't been told about them.

That's interesting. I've been hunting here in Colorado for many years and have never heard of this before.

Can you quote a source of this information? I would suppose a wolf or two may have crept into our boarders, and if not yet, probably some day will. But in what numbers are you presenting and by whose observations?

I'm not saying you are wrong. I'd just like some data so I can be educated.

Thanks!

Here's one of many, Google wolves in Colorado. One was confirmed by CPW in July of this year.

https://www.summitdaily.com/ne...me-from-yellowstone/

quote:

Originally posted by ronco:

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Sellers:
Wolves have been in Colorado for over 10 years already. No news here, move along. You just haven't been told about them.

That's interesting. I've been hunting here in Colorado for many years and have never heard of this before.

Can you quote a source of this information? I would suppose a wolf or two may have crept into our boarders, and if not yet, probably some day will. But in what numbers are you presenting and by whose observations?

I'm not saying you are wrong. I'd just like some data so I can be educated.

Thanks!

Here's one of many, Google wolves in Colorado. One was confirmed by CPW in July of this year.

https://www.summitdaily.com/ne...me-from-yellowstone/

ronco, thanks for the link!

This article says wolves have not been spotted in Colorado for the past 50 years. I guess that is my sense as well, however, as I stated before, I would not doubt that some stray wolves have wandered into the state from Yellowstone, etc.

My OP is about the wolf huggers wanting to introduce a pack of 25 wolves into our state. That, is a whole 'nuther ballgame.

I will google wolves in Colorado as you suggested, to get more info and more education.

Thanks again!

We need wolves in Colorado like we need bourbon at a AA meeting.

Dingbat libs who tromp around on trails in their Birkenstocks and carry their poop in plastic bags. Those are idiots who think wildlife is just for their viewing pleasure.

Colorado is overrun with those idiots.

BH63

Bill / Oregon. Your right wolves will introduce themselves if you drop them off at the door. Then they move in. Then once they have cleaned out the refrigerator they move on to the next one. As Mr. Atkinson has said" our elk populations are no where near the density that would create the problems we are seeing in Wa. with the hoof disease.

I worked in natural resource management for over 35 years. My management philosophy was management and balance not management and sacrifice. With the wolf we seem to be doing the later! I would like to see the wolf in the landscape but not at the cost it is incurring. As a side note I hope you are not a NIMBY.

The problem is the unlimited protection they receive.

They have become almost holy to the enviro-wako crowd.

quote:

Originally posted by OLBIKER:

quote:

Originally posted by Lamar:
that solution ain't the answer.
we can buy a wolf tag for 12$ over the counter it's good for 364 days.[then you buy a new one]
there is no need to sss, we pretty much have a green light to shoot them on sight.
the wolves are still here.

We are not allowed to shot them here.I guess we have to wish them away.

A lot of 3 letter solutions going on up there.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
The problem is the unlimited protection they receive.

They have become almost holy to the enviro-wako crowd.

Almost holy??? How about holiest of all animals to these whack jobs. Where wolves occur, I think a Barnes TTSX is probably the best deer or elk bullet a fellow can shoot. They're environmentally friendly, after all.

I would but Mt lions and G bears a hair above wolves to the envrio wackos

P-dog,

Wolves have proven to be able to put a huge dent in big game populations, which in turn, reduces the amount of tags allotted, which in turn, reduces human hunter numbers.

And the enviros can claim to be 'helping' the environment. It's a win-win for them.

So, yes, I think they revere the wolf over everything.

quote:

Originally posted by k-22hornet.:
P-dog,

Wolves have proven to be able to put a huge dent in big game populations, which in turn, reduces the amount of tags allotted, which in turn, reduces human hunter numbers.

And the enviros can claim to be 'helping' the environment. It's a win-win for them.

So, yes, I think they revere the wolf over everything.

You well not get to much argument from me.

Surefire7, in time those wyoming wolves will migrate into colorado. They don't need to introduce them.

Guys, I caught lot of shit before by defending wolves as part of wilderness , I also believe they should be and fortunately are game animal and legal to hunt.
Nature has got funny way to show us that we can be pretty insignificant as wolves first hammered game in Montana, but game got smarter and voila, we have highest numbers of elk and deer last few year despite liberal tags and liberal/ long seasons.
I for one like all big game predators as it adds to mystique and not as easy hunting and keeping us a bit on the edge while we are “ out there “
But , again, that’s just me.
Now, you guys can give me a lot of shit again...

Not sure about wolves in Colorado, but I sure would like to see grizzlies reintroduced. When I hear people whine about it, I wonder are we such wussies in Colorado compared to Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, not to mention Alaska? I lived, hunted and was an assistant guide in Montana through the 70s and only a couple of times had an encounter, both turned out to be bluffs, but I was armed. Colorado Grizzlies!

quote:

Originally posted by bentaframe:
Don't forget NE Washington. Our WDFW says they did not introduce wolves into Wa. They might be right, I don't know if they did or did not but they did not stop the tribes and others from bootlegging them in. They are now beginning to cut back our hunting seasons with point restrictions and either sex harvest. We met the requirements of 15 breeding pairs and now our own biologists admit they really don't know how many we have in the 3 NE counties.

They are beginning to eat more cows and the left in Western Washington are lobbying to remove the ranchers and not the wolves. You can't even make this stuff up !!!

25-30 years back there were lots of wolves in the Salmo Basin & a few Caribou & Moose.

quote:

I lived, hunted and was an assistant guide in Montana through the 70s and only a couple of times had an encounter,

A lot less bears there then, then now and you still had trouble.

Sure but I was out in the wilderness a lot and it added excitement. I was rarely without my 270. When it was home or in camp, I had my 45. No regrets. A few grizzlies in Estes Park some in the Needles Wilderness area would be a good start.

quote:

A few grizzlies in Estes Park some in the Needles Wilderness area would be a good start.

Be very carful what you wish for.

I see where he is going with that.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/c...ot-box/#3347381242a6



Aug 5, 2020,07:00am EDT

Wolf Wars Move To The Ballot Box

Chris Dorsey Contributor
Travel
I cover sporting travel, recreational real estate and premium outdoor products.


Colorado Initiative Latest Effort To Manage Wildlife Through Public Opinion



In 1990, California voters passed Proposition 114 which banned mountain lion hunting in that state and set into motion scores of similar ballot measures across the country, usurping the authority of state wildlife agencies that are increasingly being subjected to the whims of public opinion. The ironic result of Prop 117 has been that more mountain lions are now killed each year in California than before the supposed ban was implemented.


The Sacramento Bee reports that an average of 98 mountain lions are killed annually under what are dubbed “depredation permits,” (issued by the state when mountain lions kill livestock and pets), which is nearly four times the number prior to the passage of the ballot initiative. The law of unintended consequences prevailed as it often does when emotionally charged wildlife management issues wind up on the ballot.

What is in question is whether wildlife should be managed by voters or the agencies whose mandate it is to do so. “States have wildlife departments run by professional biologists, researchers and other scientists,” says Jeff Crane of the Washington D.C.-based Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation. “The US has the most successful wildlife management model in the history of the world, and the core principle is that these professionals are entrusted to make the decisions for the benefit of both people and wildlife.”

Come November, Colorado residents will head to the polls to decide if Canadian gray wolves should be introduced to the state’s Western Slope. Initiative 107 made it to the ballot thanks largely to groups outside the state of Colorado. According to reports filed with the Colorado Secretary of State, more than 75 percent of the funding for the petition has come from out of state sources, including groups funded by George Soros, the billionaire liberal progressive who created the Open Society Foundations, which reports having a $19 billion endowment.

Despite biologists at the state’s own Parks & Wildlife Division recommending against an introduction of wolves, Governor Jared Polis has affirmed state law prohibiting agency staffers from publicly sharing opinions on ballot issues. His husband, 39-year old Marlon Reis, however, is a long-time vegan and outspoken animal rights activist who has weighed-in on the debate, supporting wolf introduction efforts in Colorado. In his Facebook posts, Reis quotes nearly verbatim from the faction supporting wolf introductions, “Rather than decimating elk herds as some feared they might,” he writes referencing wolf introductions in Yellowstone National Park, “these apex predators filled-in an ecosystem gap.”

That’s a gap, however, that many sportsmen feel they should be filling. “Hunters have provided the majority of conservation funding in this country for more than a generation,” says Ted Harvey, a former state senator who is heading up an effort to oppose the wolf introduction initiative. “If their key argument for introducing wolves is that it will improve the health of the habitat by reducing elk and deer numbers, then allow hunters who pay expensive license fees and contribute mightily to the state’s rural economy to fulfill that role. Hunters can reduce herd numbers without wreaking havoc on livestock as wolves have done in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho where they were released decades ago.”

Roughly 350,000 big game hunting licenses are sold each year in Colorado and sportsmen contribute $1.8 billion annually to the state’s economy, according to a 2018 study commissioned by the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) division. “Colorado is home to roughly 300,000 elk,” says retired CPW northwest regional manager Ron Velarde. “That’s more than any other western state by a considerable margin.”

And that’s what has many on the state’s Western Slope so concerned. Opponents to the introduction of wolves point to what’s already happened in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana to better understand what would happen should the wolves be brought in. “In Idaho, 35 wolves were initially introduced and that population now exceeds 1,500 animals,” writes former congressman and rancher Bob Beauprez in a Complete Colorado editorial. “The result has been devastating to backcountry big game outfitters. Half of them have gone out of business following the decline of elk numbers and the remaining 50 percent report a drop in business.”


What some see as a black and white issue has become a blue versus red debate, with densely populated Democratic urban centers imposing their will through the ballot box on rural, largely Republican counties.

“Activists in the greater Denver metroplex gathered the vast majority of required petition signatures to qualify the question for the ballot,” writes Beauprez. “Of course, they don’t want wolves released in their backyards. The drafters of the initiative made sure wolves would be foisted on the folks on the Western Slope.”

“That’s like asking someone in New York City if they’d prefer trash be dumped in their neighborhood or in New Jersey,” says Harvey. “When you see the slick ads from the wolf groups you wonder how we even survived without the wolves in the first place.”

One such group is called the Rocky Mountain Wolf Project (RMWP), a collection of mostly out of state environmental and animal rights organizations including the Sierra Club (embroiled in its own recent controversy over the racist views of its founder, John Muir), Defenders of Wildlife, and Natural Resources Defense Council among others. RMWP is not a non-profit organization, so the San Francisco-based Tides Center—backed by Soros—filed for non-profit status in Colorado on behalf of RMWP.

Visit the RMWP’s website and you’re greeted with commercials and videos that look like the sophisticated productions associated with lobby efforts of multi-billion dollar corporations rather than grassroots environmental groups. Leading their effort is longtime wolf advocate Mike Phillips, a former Yellowstone manager turned director of Ted Turner’s Endangered Species Fund. “What we did in Yellowstone could be done in Colorado,” says Phillips in one of several videos on the group’s site. “Our goal is to establish wolves from the high arctic to the Mexican border.”

“Unfortunately wolves are going to pay the price if that happens,” says Harvey. “The people in the areas where they would be released simply don’t want them and that leads to bad outcomes for the wolves. Talk to the people around Yellowstone and they don’t view the wolf introduction as a success. It’s about the federal government shoving bad policy down their throats from inside the Beltway.”

“Research demonstrates that after Colorado voters are presented with all of the facts, not just dubious claims by proponents,” says Mark Truax of Coloradans Protecting Wildlife, a group representing a coalition of farm, ranch, recreation and conservation organizations opposed to the wolf initiative, “they are no longer supportive of the introduction of wolves through the ballot box.”

Those views don’t show up on the RMWP website. Instead, you’re greeted with a man-on-the-street video asking random Denver passersby the simple question, “Are there wolves in Colorado?” Several of those queried answered in the affirmative, depicted as if they’re ignorant urbanites who wouldn’t have a clue about wolves. Then the voice on the video informs them that there are no wolves in Colorado, as if the notion of such is ridiculous unless the initiative allows the predators to be introduced in the state. Problem is, like several of the statements found on the RMWP website, the information is either false or misleading.

In February, CPW officials confirmed the presence of a pack of six wolves in northwest Colorado that had moved in from neighboring Wyoming. Numerous other wolf sightings, moreover, were reported prior to the agency’s announcement. Thus, as a headline in Denver’s 5280 magazine asked in its June 30 edition, “If Wolves Are Already in Colorado, Should We Still Reintroduce Them?”

Not if you ask the state’s ranching and outfitting community. Some 38 of Colorado’s 64 counties have adopted resolutions opposing the wolf initiative, and many of these are in rural areas where ranchers fear for their livestock should the wolves take hold and expand as they have in other states.

Idaho rancher, Jeff Siddoway, made national news when he reported losing 176 sheep in a single night as wolves chased his flock over a steep embankment, causing $28,000 in damages. Since wolves were introduced into that state in 1995, Idaho has confirmed that nearly 1,000 cattle, more than 3,000 sheep, 53 herd dogs, and horses, goats, mules and llamas have fallen prey to wolves—though the numbers are likely much higher as many attacks go unreported.


None of these facts show up in RMWP materials. The site, instead, also goes further to proclaim emphatically that zero campers have been injured by wolves in National Parks. Not true, however, if you ask Matthew and Elisa Rispoli and their two young sons who were asleep in their tent in Banff National Park last August when a Canadian gray wolf tore through the tent, attacked the father and started to drag him away.

“It was like something out of a horror movie,” wrote Elisa in a Facebook post that was widely quoted by international media outlets. “I don’t think I’ll ever be able to properly describe the terror.”

RMWP also fails to mention that the Canadian gray wolf is a dramatically larger wolf than ever existed in Colorado. The Canadian subspecies can grow to more than six feet in length and weigh as much as 175-pounds according to Live Science, a sharp contrast to the much smaller 110-pound Great Plains wolf that roamed the state a generation ago. “These substantially larger wolves are dramatically more effective at killing elk and moose,” says Harvey. “This isn’t a reintroduction at all, it’s an introduction of an exotic, non-native species because no such animal ever existed in Colorado.”

“According to the Wyoming Game & Fish Department,” says Velarde, “before the first wolf introduction in 1997, the moose population numbered over 10,000 animals. Since then it has declined to fewer than 1,400 animals as recently as 2018. Most of this decline, according to that state’s biologists, can be attributed to the introduction of wolves to Wyoming.”


The fact that Canadian gray wolves are known carriers of the deadly hydatid disease is yet another fact that didn’t make it to the RMWP website. This disease is caused by the tapeworm cyst Echinococcus granulosus. Humans can contract the disease when handling infected carcasses, from soil, dust and plants exposed to the cysts. According to a study reported in the Journal of Wildlife Diseases, “The tapeworm was detected in 39 of 63 wolves in Idaho and 38 of 60 wolves in Montana.”

For one Idaho nurse who contracted the disease when she and her husband moved from their Boise home to the mountains frequented by wolves, the disease was life altering. It often affects the liver, kidneys, lungs and brain, according to the World Health Organization.

“In 2001, I got sick and became confused,” says the woman who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal from pro-wolf groups. “It wasn’t until 2003 that I was diagnosed with hydatid disease. It’s a horrible affliction.”

According to the National Institutes of Health, hydatid disease has been the cause of at least 41 deaths between 1990 and 2007 across the U.S.

In 1859, John Stuart Mill in his book On Liberty, famously argued against the tyranny of the majority in what has endured as a cautionary tale to democracies the world over. When it comes to managing wildlife through the ballot box, it’s all about a public relations battle where facts often become the endangered species. Motivate the electorate through emotionally charged messaging—wildlife experts and science be damned—and you’re apt to have your way…for better or worse.

“I don’t believe in managing wildlife through the ballot,” says Velarde. “When you take management away from professional wildlife biologists you’re making a mistake…because there’s always unintended consequences.”

Just ask California.