I dont understand the hostility towards wolf reintroduction in Colorado

Loo.wii

WKR
Joined
Sep 23, 2022
Messages
515
Here and on quite a few other public forums I've observed hostility towards the reintroduction of wolves in CO. Call me ignorant or dumb but I really dont understand the hate. I can understand the " THESE DENVER LIBTARDS WHO KNOW NOTHING GOT TO VOTE ON BLAHBLAH BLAH." perspective, but other than that I don't think its a net negative to the ecosystem, the state, ranchers, or hunters. Now I understand that there may be an argument that broadly suggests that "they're the wrong wolves" but i am not educated enough on the ecology and the actual impact of different wolf sub species on wild life or the ecosystem. If i am not mistaken, I think ranchers are reimbursed for livestock killed by wolves. If this is the case is there really a cost to the re introduction.
In the hunting perspective I also Don't think that reintroduction is negative. Multiple states have healthy wolf populations and still have healthy game populations. I imagine that a good wolf population would solve the issue of private land owners with massive swaths of land essentially having a monopoly on elk and deer in an area and capitalizing on it by charging ridiculous access fees. Broadly I think that predation by wolves on elk and deer will cause these animals to migrate in ways that are consistent with their historic patters of movement, effectively disbursing them in a way that is beneficial to your average public land hunter.

All that being said. While we are at it we should also reintroduce grizzlies to their historic range and buffalos too.

Im sure my opinion will get hated on but i hope this spurs a productive conversation that conveys nuances that I may not be aware of.


Edit.
Getting stabbed with a rusty blade by a gizz in the middle of the woods is better than getting mauled by a crack head in downtown Denver.




EDIT 2


ill add this to both sides of the thread.


I'll try to make this short. As I mentioned in my original comment, I am not an expert so I a speaking broadly when I share my opinions and perspectives. I didn't expect this thread to blowup as much as it did, and it really did show me the good, bad and ugly of the Rokslide community which i am very fond of. That being said, I didn't have the time to go through and read every article linked or dive into the depths of the internet to find what there was.

To me the most compelling parts of the anti wolf argument stem from the perspective that a wolf is a human competition for food. Taking this idea and running with it a bit more, i would estimate that the people who share this perspective use or plan to use or would like to use hunting as their primary source of meat. So maintaining this logic, why would you introduce competition that is quite literally taking food off of your plate? In most cases the data reflects that when wolves come into an area hunter success goes down.

This argument alone has had a major influence on my opinion.

In addition to the aforementioned, the anecdotes shared by those of you who are closer to the ranching community about the ineffectiveness of the "reimbursement" programs in various states opened my eyes quite a bit. In hindsight it should have been obvious because having worked for the gov in various capacities I personally know that getting what you need when you need it is like banging your head against a brick wall. These anecdotes shared the fact that cows grazing on public land aren't baby sat throughout the season and so a rancher might be down X number of animals and not know it for weeks of months, making it even more difficult to prove to the governing parties that an animal was a victim of predation.

The next issue would be the seemingly shady way that the wolves were introduced in CO. particularly the fact that there very likely were already wolves in the state and the state felt it necessary to add more instead of allowing wolves to continue to naturally filter south as they likely wood. The fact that there is NO management plan for them seems indicative that there is no desire to allow harvesting of wolves in CO ever.

After stewing on it I fall into the slightly anti wolf crowd. Though I am not in favor of the method or means of (re)introduction. I don't think wolves are completely terrible. I think it would have been better to allow them to continue to trickle into CO and implement a robust managment plan that takes into account multiple perspectives.

That being said I appreciate the love and hate that i got from the members here. The next pot I want to stir why is there so much hate for adult onset hunters among the saltier members.

P.s. I was asked and prodded about my signature. Its a joke that plays on 2 things, one being the fact that I am almost certainly the only Haitian born person on this site. On the other hand I knew from the second I made my account I knew there would be very little overlap in what I and most of the members here agree on besides hunting = good. There are some here who can't take a joke but thats okay.

I got alot out of this discussion.

Theres so much more to unpack but I have to go do nerd things now.

YES!! SHORT !!
 
Last edited:

wmr89

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
273
Location
Utah
Even for people who think wolves should be on the landscape, a lot of people disagree with how it was done. Ballot box biology mandating reintroduction when wolves were already starting to expand to CO from WY. The ballot measure snuck in that wolves would be a "non-game" species, making it very unlikely that there will ever be any hunting or serious management of their population. Beyond the obvious effect of wolves on ungulate populations these are a few reasons people are upset.
 
Last edited:

Laramie

WKR
Joined
Apr 17, 2020
Messages
2,619
Here and on quite a few other public forums.....
It is pretty simple for me. Wolves, grizzly, and other romanticized predators that activists love are not allowed to be managed like other animals are. When their populations are left unchecked, they do negatively impact large ungulate populations, reducing hunting opportunities, and causing problems with livestock. Yes, ranchers can jump through hoops to get reimbursed but if you think that is a break even for them, you are mistaken. As Dos suggested above, you need to do research from multiple perspectives.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
5,734
Location
Lenexa, KS
If you can't understand the hostility of this issue, then perhaps you lack empathy.

Have you tried putting yourself in the shoes of the folks that are upset? Have you genuinely considered the merits of their arguments?
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2017
Messages
528
Location
Boise
I appreciate that your opinion differs from the general consensus here but your assumptions about what effects wolves have on big game populations go against what has happened in states with wolf populations.

Multiple states have healthy wolf populations and still have healthy game populations.
Look up historical elk populations in the Lolo zone in ID. Elk have been decimated since wolf re-introduction.
I imagine that a good wolf population would solve the issue of private land owners with massive swaths of land essentially having a monopoly on elk and deer in an area and capitalizing on it by charging ridiculous access fees.
In reality, wolves push more animals onto private land as wolves generally want to avoid people and the private ranches are sanctuaries for elk.
Broadly I think that predation by wolves on elk and deer will cause these animals to migrate in ways that are consistent with their historic patters of movement, effectively disbursing them in a way that is beneficial to your average public land hunter.
The opposite has occurred throughout much of Idaho. In the areas I have hunted, the elk are spending less and less time on their traditional summer range. Because of the wolf population in these areas, elk are spending more time lower in the range and creating additional issues for landowners (not to mention not being available to your average public land hunter).
 
OP
Loo.wii

Loo.wii

WKR
Joined
Sep 23, 2022
Messages
515
It is pretty simple for me. Wolves, grizzly, and other romanticized predators that activists love are not allowed to be managed like other animals are. When their populations are left unchecked, they do negatively impact large ungulate populations, reducing hunting opportunities, and causing problems with livestock. Yes, ranchers can jump through hoops to get reimbursed but if you think that is a break even for them, you are mistaken. As Dos suggested above, you need to do research from multiple perspectives.
Fair point. This is why I wanted to strike up this conversion. In my perspective pred populations should be managed. I think that this aspect (the management of predators) is the most important part of the discussion.
 

Ten Bears

WKR
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
1,498
Location
Michigan
I’ll also add the premise of reintroducing wolves based on the logic that they belong here is flawed. All North American Wolves come from Coyotes thousands of years ago, they were also called prairie wolves by name up until 1900. So we have always had wolves, the true native wolves.

Why don’t people care about reintroducing caribou or sage grouse ? Why is it always a predator that has to be helped or protected ?

I’ll tell you why…It’s because you have been brainwashed by liberals and are being used as a tool to complete a task for them. These wolves that by flawed logic are being planted will never be allowed to be managed, ever. Quit pretending this is about some science.
 

Mike 338

WKR
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
623
Location
Idaho
Well, I've spoken to ranchers who were not compensated. Something about proof. Are you ever really compensated on a killed cow that can no longer give you calves? Grazing on open range means you don't directly manage your stock till roundup. How you gonna know when your stock has been predated upon?

Then there's the game (deer and elk). It'll take a few years for the wolves to multiply and disperse but before long, you won't see or hear the game animals like before. Elk are no longer as vocal and the general behavior of both species will change. They'll stick to cover more. In short, they'll adopt different survival behavior which maybe increases their mortality due to ambush predators. Anyway, you'll be say'in, where'd all the deer and elk go.

All in all though, the genie is out of the bottle. Complaining or defending doesn't change anything now.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
978
Location
Colorado
It’s not a reintroduction, it’s an introduction.

People from California and Chicago brought their politics and made this happen.

The leaders of the introduction, are anti hunting, anti gun leftists.

There will never be a management program or season on wolves in Colorado, due to politics.

Denver gave a giant **** you to the rest of the state, and CPW has already been shady and dishonest.

There are so many things wrong with this introduction, it’s sickening.

And…who do you think pays the rancher it’s 15k per cow that’ll be killed?
 
Top