antelopedundee
Well-known member
Visitors don't fly into the park by copter. They drive and spend money on the way through Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, etc. Money that wouldn't be spent if they weren't going to visit the park.
Yellowstone Park Wolves
- Thread starter MLC
- Start date
I don’t think he’s arguing that they don’t spend money. Perhaps what he’s saying is that it’s not a good thing.
A lot of people are not in favor of a tourism based economy and the “benefits” that come with it.
That gets into a far different topic than wolves though.
Bioviating is more applicable to the pro wolf groups! Think about the points you just made ? Did it ever dawn on you how much money has been put into the wolf reintroduction and study. This wolf issue has a money trail that is traceable back decades. To be honest YNP revenue is the last thing on the pro wolf agenda. One thing I do agree with you about is the complexity of these issues but I can tell you that the extremist are more prevalent in the pro wolf arena. Vanishing wilderness , migration routes lost to development , more population residing in the Rocky Mountain states are impacting the big game populations. Family ranches becoming less viable are real problems , maybe the gray wolf was not such a great idea! Much of the hatred on this issue is because people get talked down to and the explanation of why we need wolves is not acceptable. The fact that there are those in disagreement means that these people are to uneducated to understand the big picture of the Gray wolf issue and it’s not true at all! It’s never going to be a good idea to refer to the other side as bioviating extremist. Just a thought
This is a great point to this discussion MT, Yellowstone and the surrounding area stands on it beauty and wildness. OMG was my reaction when o laid eyes on it , as far as wolves bringing in tourist money I’m sure it’s much less than the actual cost of maintaining the population.
We re getting off the track now, but tourism based economies don't support living wages but for only a very select few business owners and even then it's not as good as one would think.
I say this from the standpoint of owning and operating a Canadian fishing lodge in a former life.
I also am highly suspect of the "studies" that suggest wolves have a high impact on the economic activity in and around the park. After all people came in droves when there were no wolves in the park
That time is long sense passed. The first time I went to YNP I was pretty disappointed by the traffic and the over all stupidity of excessive visitors.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
No "sides" here. In fact I opposed the "reintroduction" as vetted prior to 1995. But it happened; wolves are here; wolf advocates and watchers are spending a lot of money doing so. I was merely offering facts and ideas for YNP to capitalize on the situation.
The Endangered Species Act is front and center to the issue. "Bloviating" about lines in the sand and mounting opposition to the pro-wolf groups is counter productive. Recent wingnut legislation enacted in Montana and Idaho has only exacerbated the issues, with prediction by some that wolves will soon be back on the ESA list.
If that happens, then another unacceptable proliferation will exponentially expand wolves' numbers and ranges throughout the west ... counter productive to better control and management of this species.
one ate E grain
Active member
he goes on to say,
Oh really? People sometimes refer to the balance of nature metaphorically but I find it's use by a Park Superintendent to be careless. There is no balance of nature nor any balanced ecosystem.
I’m not in opposition to your points and I’m in no position to judge sides. I am however very cynical to the argument that wolf financial impact to the surrounding community is positive. I’m much more incline to believe the opposite is true . If a forensic audit was done on wolf impact to the surrounding economy i would guess it completely detrimental to the area. Like others have said Yellowstone is never short on visitors !
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
The Economic Benefits and Struggles of Wolves in Yellowstone
Since the reintroduction of gray wolves in the mid-1990s, biologists and economists have been astounded by the amount of change these predators have wrought.
www.nathab.com
The above link attests to economic impact of wolves to the YNP gateway communities. It's not my opinion; it's credible analysis. Whatever the dollar amounts are, it does reflect a potential for YNP itself to benefit.
Allow cynicism to doubt the research and analysis of professionals (and there are several other studies as well), but regardless there is potential for positive gains from this wolf debacle. Why continue the rhetoric emphasizing "sides", and dwelling on monies already spent ... water under the bridge. Let's agree to move ahead in some positive way.
Yes monies already spent but what is lost ? Read closely it’s rhetoric pure and simple, as you may have read forensic accountability not slanted numbers issued by those who profit off the wolf ! We will never see real numbers , not when so many are lining their pockets ! Residents suffer , I hate to see acceptable losses of live stock !! So easy to say when they belong to someone else . 21% reduction of elk harvest , 85% of wolf diet Elk !! Wow I see that as negative impact. Yes I agree with you that they are here but regardless it was a poor decision causing a political and game management problems that did not exist before reintroduction !The Economic Benefits and Struggles of Wolves in Yellowstone
Since the reintroduction of gray wolves in the mid-1990s, biologists and economists have been astounded by the amount of change these predators have wrought.
The above link attests to economic impact of wolves to the YNP gateway communities. It's not my opinion; it's credible analysis. Whatever the dollar amounts are, it does reflect a potential for YNP itself to benefit.
Allow cynicism to doubt the research and analysis of professionals (and there are several other studies as well), but regardless there is potential for positive gains from this wolf debacle. Why continue the rhetoric emphasizing "sides", and dwelling on monies already spent ... water under the bridge. Let's agree to move ahead in some positive way.
one ate E grain
Active member
Frankly I don't see Yellowstone as a sustainable tourism model. The carbon footprint is huge. Everyone traveling such long distances to get in, all the service industry that must be maintained with food and fuel let alone the tourists. Making money off wolves should be the very last thing Superintendent Sholley should be thinking about.
“I’m going to make it my life’s work to
have Yellowstone National Park turned into a wilderness area…. Most the infrastructure would go…. Wildlife management would go to the states Montana and Wyoming ”
Steve Rinella at 23:35 on Joe Rogan Experience Podcast #1716
You think this is coincidence or he reads this thread?
Sytes
Well-known member
Meanwhile in Estes... 
kdvr.com
Nothing new here folks... the more interaction between wildlife (NPS zoo animals) and humans, the less fear and the increased incidents.
Watch: Bull elk charges onlookers in Estes Park
Wildlife officials are urging Coloradans and tourists to be cautious of elk in the high country following a number of close calls captured on camera in Estes Park.
kdvr.com
Nothing new here folks... the more interaction between wildlife (NPS zoo animals) and humans, the less fear and the increased incidents.
“Part of my life goal is to get Yellowstone turned into a wilderness area. Rip out all of the infrastructure, leave the highways in place, it becomes a wilderness area that will give it enhanced protection, no motorized use, it’s more protected, then wildlife management goes to Montana and Wyoming”
Rinella on meateater podcast #295 at 32:50
I’m going to have a heavy backpack of elk sheds the first day
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Then where do all those tourists go instead? Do they not go? Do they go to another NP? Do they go to the adjacent FS lands? Are we simply moving the problem or solving something?
Do we really want to give MT control over wildlife in YNP? There's not even a wildlife designation for bison anymore.
Plus, we'd have shoulder seasons, etc.
Let the park be, change some practices and be consistent with the organic act & the creation act.
Similar threads
