Elk vs. Wolves

[MLC]

Last winter a local theater in Bozeman showed the documentary, The Trouble With Wolves. If you ever get the opportunity to watch it, it does an excellent job of explaining both sides of the wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone and the impact on the local ranchers.

 

[elkantlers]

I believe that limited hunting will eventually be used as a management tool, as long as we ensure that it's in the management plan that is to be developed over the next year.

Maybe they will let trappers manage them with Cage traps.

 

[Bowhunter999]

It appears that wolf ‘people’ are of the impression that if x number of wolves are introduced into a area (for heaven only knows what reason) that that number will always remain the same ! It also appears that they know very little about reproduction. The only thing that keeps wolves in check, other than man, is food availability. As long as there is food, wolves will continue to bless us with more of their kind ! How did humans ever manage to exist without wolves to make our lives so much better ??

 

[antlerradar]

I am far form an expert on Western MT so HTers with better info correct me if I am wrong. Since wolf reintroduction elk populations have increased in many places. The problem is the the increase is for the most part all on private land down in the valleys and elk numbers have tanked on the public land. Wolves may not be the only reason for this migration however.

 

[tillicant]

Time to take matters into ones own hands. We don't need or want them in Colorado.

We thought about that in Wisconsin. They re introduce wolves along with an Elk population. Elk are not winning.
In hopes of a wolf season this year but the anti's are already fighting it.

 

[sethkuhl]

I am far form an expert on Western MT so HTers with better info correct me if I am wrong. Since wolf reintroduction elk populations have increased in many places. The problem is the the increase is for the most part all on private land down in the valleys and elk numbers have tanked on the public land. Wolves may not be the only reason for this migration however.

I also am not an expert but what I have seen is this. Elk numbers outside if 3 safe havens on private land have drastically decreased. Fish wildlife and parks answer has been more tags on public land to seemingly finish off what is left. I know people that I have discussed this with in my area would agree. There is a reason most of us drive 230 miles to hunt when it used to be out of our backdoor. One very obvious thing has changed. It is definatly not hunter numbers. These are the good old days for some landowners but not so much for public landers.

Last point is the magical number pulled out of the clouds for how many elk should be here is a very interesting concept that I need to learn more about but my personal opinion right now is that it is much like the rest of our world, crazy.

 

[mtmuley]

I am far form an expert on Western MT so HTers with better info correct me if I am wrong. Since wolf reintroduction elk populations have increased in many places. The problem is the the increase is for the most part all on private land down in the valleys and elk numbers have tanked on the public land. Wolves may not be the only reason for this migration however.

Yep. Where I am that is the case. Wolves moved elk to the lowlands. There are large herds living amongst the sprawl. Now, generations of elk don't know any different. Valley elk. But, thinking elk numbers have tanked on public is not the case. In my area (disclaimer) I can still hunt and fill my tag. Finding and killing an elk is harder. Just have to adapt. mtmuley

 

[sethkuhl]

I also am not an expert but what I have seen is this. Elk numbers outside if 3 safe havens on private land have drastically decreased. Fish wildlife and parks answer has been more tags on public land to seemingly finish off what is left. I know people that I have discussed this with in my area would agree. There is a reason most of us drive 230 miles to hunt when it used to be out of our backdoor. One very obvious thing has changed. It is definatly not hunter numbers. These are the good old days for some landowners but not so much for public landers.

Last point is the magical number pulled out of the clouds for how many elk should be here is a very interesting concept that I need to learn more about but my personal opinion right now is that it is much like the rest of our world, crazy.

I also will add there are lots of other problems as well with other predators. The possibility of forage and cover change in their old lands. Reduced logging on aging stands increasing down material.
The forest service in my area has reramped logging the last three years and my hope is that this will bring the elk back to the forested and huntable lands.
I know I am bitter about all of this, but the answer in the yearly fish and game meeting has been telling the sportsmen that our elk numbers are too high. Then right before it opens to public discussion they always preface it with " we know there are too many wolves. What do you guys want to talk about."

 

[sethkuhl]

Yep. Where I am that is the case. Wolves moved elk to the lowlands. There are large herds living amongst the sprawl. Now, generations of elk don't know any different. Valley elk. But, thinking elk numbers have tanked on public is not the case. In my area (disclaimer) I can still hunt and fill my tag. Finding and killing an elk is harder. Just have to adapt. mtmuley

I also have harvested my share of elk in these reduced numbers. But the good old days are gone. Dont get me started on the mule deer.

 

[LuketheDog]

Time to take matters into ones own hands. We don't need or want them in Colorado.

Yes, go for it, and please tell us how that works out for you...

 

[Paul from Colorado]

Well this spun off in the direction that I had hoped it would not, I know feelings are strong on this. Unfortunately, we have gotten to the point that wildlife biology is now run through the ballot box and as mentioned we are governed by the front range “bleeding heart liberals”.

I did the google deep dive on the biological reports and there are not as many as you would think. But the consensus is that habitat improves due to lower elk populations (bad in my opinion) and small game numbers increase. The elk and deer populations level out after 10 to 15 years of predation with peaks and valleys as the wolf population grows and shrinks. The shrinkage is due to individual wolves leaving the pack and starting out on their own, (thanks Wyoming, we really appreciate sharing your bounty). Now the one study that showed the populations of elk and deer stabilizing is from Yellowstone. Since Yellowstone has Bison, we must look at that and insert beef and sheep into that predation mix to try and figure out how this will even out. And one glaring item missing from three of these studies is the use of hunting on elk and deer populations. So, the long and short is it’s all up in the air.

None of the studies mentioned or brought up the issue of elk migrating onto private property. I can see this happening but to what level will ranchers and hay producers be forced to drive out the elk or use hunters and management to protect their breadbasket?

The rebel in me loves the three S plan but I don’t think I would do well loosing my hunting privileges or looking at life from behind bars.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

This thread certainly is amusing.

I fail to understand why a DFG employee would say they can’t talk about them, or maintain the continued implied secrecy. FOIA rules apply to them as well n

 

[SAJ-99]

This thread certainly is amusing.

I fail to understand why a DFG employee would say they can’t talk about them, or maintain the continued implied secrecy. FOIA rules apply to them as well n

The three rules of a good conspiracy,
1) it has to involve the government
2) it has to go against you
3) it has to be a secret

 

[LuketheDog]

The three rules of a good conspiracy,
1) it has to involve the government
2) it has to go against you
3) it has to be a secret

4) it involves the Clintons, but not the ones they actually are part of

 

[Straight Arrow]

Elk vs. Wolves: Hands down, elk meat tastes much better than canine meat!

 

[JT88]

This topic always amuses me.

Wolves don't know which state they're in. There is plenty of habitat in Colorado to support wolves, not to mention the largest elk herd in the world. Wolves travel a great deal. Reintroducing wolves in CO will only speed up the process that started when they reintroduced wolves in Yellowstone, and for that matter, there were wolves in Yellowstone before the reintroduction in small numbers. People need to consider how much these animals travel and how they form new packs. As packs grow, juveniles leave and start new packs. Yes, they affect elk behavior. An animal with no natural predator will behave very differently. They displace elk, as @mtmuley said. And they eat elk. A lot of elk. 20+ per year per wolf is a good average.

But this idea that we have to "take matters into our own hands" is impossible. Whether or not they voted to reintroduce wolves, they would expand into CO and beyond eventually. They will go where the food and habitat exist to support them. Shooting them out of existence doesn't work, even where it is legal. Love or hate them, they're here to stay now. Not just in MT, WY, ID, OR etc... They'll fill in the gaps without any help

 

[sethkuhl]

This thread certainly is amusing.

I fail to understand why a DFG employee would say they can’t talk about them, or maintain the continued implied secrecy. FOIA rules apply to them as well n

Years ago, (can't say exactly how many) they would ask if any wolves were seen. I replied yes two times and was told both times by FWP that that was not possible there are no wolves in the area. (basically calling me a liar) I have a problem with that. government conspiracy i don't think so hands tied by rediculous things pushed down through legislation absolutely. Did someone say the clintons?

 

[Colorado hunter Tim]

This topic always amuses me.

Wolves don't know which state they're in. There is plenty of habitat in Colorado to support wolves, not to mention the largest elk herd in the world. Wolves travel a great deal. Reintroducing wolves in CO will only speed up the process that started when they reintroduced wolves in Yellowstone, and for that matter, there were wolves in Yellowstone before the reintroduction in small numbers. People need to consider how much these animals travel and how they form new packs. As packs grow, juveniles leave and start new packs. Yes, they affect elk behavior. An animal with no natural predator will behave very differently. They displace elk, as @mtmuley said. And they eat elk. A lot of elk. 20+ per year per wolf is a good average.

But this idea that we have to "take matters into our own hands" is impossible. Whether or not they voted to reintroduce wolves, they would expand into CO and beyond eventually. They will go where the food and habitat exist to support them. Shooting them out of existence doesn't work, even where it is legal. Love or hate them, they're here to stay now. Not just in MT, WY, ID, OR etc... They'll fill in the gaps without any help

Shooting them out of existence is exactly why they are not in Colorado. They were literally shot out of existence.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Shooting them out of existence is exactly why they are not in Colorado. They were literally shot out of existence.

And trapped, and poisoned.

 

[SAJ-99]

Years ago, (can't say exactly how many) they would ask if any wolves were seen. I replied yes two times and was told both times by FWP that that was not possible there are no wolves in the area. (basically calling me a liar) I have a problem with that. government conspiracy i don't think so hands tied by rediculous things pushed down through legislation absolutely. Did someone say the clintons?

Wait a second. I want to make sure I got this correct. So they asked you a yes/no question and then when you answered the question they said you were wrong? Why would they even ask the question?