Interesting Wolf Article- GYE

Where's Bruce?

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2013
Messages
4,056
This article from the actual Yellowstone biologists says the Enviromental Impact projections were way off and elk are killing almost double what they expected. Gray Wolves Impact Elk
Were they wrong or did they lie? The only good wolf is a dead wolf.
 

tipsntails7

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
3,437
Location
Humboldt county
Not a single time did it say it was bad for the greater yellow stone ecosystem.
Most hunters seam to have lost sight that it's not about them and their opportunities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

realunlucky

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2013
Messages
8,905
Location
Eastern Utah
Hunters lost a seat at the table that makes all the decisions. Pretty shitty deal after finding ALL the conversation efforts for decades. Whatever the wolves are a valuable part of the ecosystem oh wait plenty of data of data without them totally removed from the ecosystem and other species thriving. Are the wolves the most important part of the ecosystem now?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

freebird134

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
503
Pretty shitty deal after finding ALL the conversation efforts for decades.
Not true. If you are referring to Pittman Robertson dollars, those are ear marked for game species only. And there is a ton of waste, because those funds have to be spent on specific species, whether they need research/conservation or not. It's especially bad in whitetail research--these guys are just handed our tax money and told "do something" no matter how irrelevant.

There are a lot of non-hunters that fund conservation. And when it comes to non-game species, hunters fund almost nothing.
 

KurtR

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
898
Location
South Dakota
Non game species dont benefit from all the habitat improvements that are made with hunters dollars?
 

realunlucky

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2013
Messages
8,905
Location
Eastern Utah
Kinda sounds like the endangered species act. Put the people that benefit the most in charge of the money and the data and see why you can't trust the data

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

WyoBowhunter21

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,574
Location
Casper, Wyoming
As a hunter and conservationist I do believe that the wolves (along with some other factors) have decimated our game numbers. When I read an article like this it makes so angry that people of all walks of life take a stand and try to manage wolves. Sadly the wolf that was introduced is here to stay. Without management a lot of game (non hunted and hunted) may very well be lost. I wont go off on how they reintroduced the wrong wolf in the first place or how those wolves killed the wolves that still inhabited the western states prior to reintroduction. I disagree about non-game species and hunters not donating to those funds. For one, the North Platte River cleanup is a lot of hunters, fishers, conversationalists trying to help the environment. There is a lot of money and time donated to this one act and I believe there are others.
 

tipsntails7

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
3,437
Location
Humboldt county
In fairness we put damn near most of those species in the situation they were in with over hunting and market gunning.

By no means do I think hunters shouldn't have a seat at the table. But if all that rep is going to do is scream kill all predators, that seat holds no value.

Anyone who cared to actually pay attention to the Yellowstone ecosystem could see it was a matter of time before it took an absolute nose dive. The herd had grown to almost 2 times what the carrying capacity for that area was. The grazing land had become barren. Combine that with a wolf intro that was not done as well as it could have been and it was a perfect storm to decimate that herd. But to point the finger solely at wolves is misguided at best.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top