Join Stop the Wolf Coalition
General Topic
I’d like to reach out to those who haven’t joined or signed but we have to stand up against the reintroduction of wolves guys. This is our chance to do something about it beside complain. Let’s make a stand.
I have and now the Larimer County coordinator. Thanks for posting. Paul
Signed. Hope the CBA is on board and gets its members to sign
If you are able make sure to donate. I’m not part of this company but believe in what they stand for.
Thanks guys let’s continue to spread the word!
Stix I see Big Game Forever. I did not see backcountry hunts and anglers — not that I am surprised. Where is BHA???
Trophyhill, the CBA donated $10,500 the largest donation to date. And yes , we have notified the membership. Paul
Paul thanks for notifying members and getting more people on board so to speak. I’m a member of the CBA and hope that together we can protect Colorado. Seems like this forum is good place to advocate. Thanks again for your service.
Signed the petition and contributed....hope it helps.
Take a look at the resumes and backgrounds of some of the BHA Board of Directors. They won't be on our side.
One less .......
One less .......
I Signed the petition, donated and joined the CBA. STOP the WOLF NOW!
Done....wife agreed to sign as well. Thanks for your efforts!
Done. some one can have all our Red Wolves ,they have devastated our deer herd. Forrest
That’s terrible Forrest, hope our deer, elk and moose herd isn’t the next to suffer.
I'd suggest a bit of research before any more send money to those willing to take advantage of well meaning sportsmen.
Why is BHA being called out for not supporting them but nobody mentions RMEF, WSF, or the many other conservation organizations that are also not on the list? This would be much more in RMEF's wheelhouse than BHA.
While I'm 100% against reintroducing wolves to Colorado, I would not give a penny to this organization. What exactly are they using the donated money for? "Stopping the wolves" doesn't quite cut it for me.
I've called them all out where are RMEF, SCI, Mule Deer Foundation, BHA. I guess holding banquets and taking our money saying they are fighting for hunters is enough, but then actually doing something is not part of their agenda.
SCI is in court constantly fighting antis that are trying to stop hunting.
This wolf issue isn't trying to legally stop hunting(although I realize in a round about way, it greatly affects it). It's trying to force wolves where some of us don't want them. So it's not directly in SCI's wheel house.
That being said, I wouldn't mind if they lend some legal help on the issue.
What do you want RMEF to do at this point? They are clearly on the record as anti-wolf reintroduction. They have alerted their membership. There's not much else to be done until it is going to be on the ballot. Then the possibility of lawsuits, etc arises at which point there is a clear course of action. At this point all groups like RMEF can do is educate and ask folks not to sign the petition for the ballot initiative which they appear to be doing. Why give money to some other group that is doing the same thing but reaches FAR FAR less people? I hope RMEF uses that money to educate and alert those they can reach in greater numbers and they appear to be doing so.
What about all the local chapters of these organizations we have. I have not seen one donation or anything. Hell put a boot in front of walmart I mean do something.
Done, but had to use a ND area code as it wouldn't allow postal code.
Giving these orgs money will do nothing to stop wolves in Colorado, and the only people saying a ballot measure will force introduction are the people asking for your money.
The prudent thing to do would be to learn from WY, ID, and MT and get a management plan approved and in place that has the lowest viable population allowed by the USFWS, and has hunting/trapping as a means of control. The USFWS has already stated they have no intentions of introducing wolves to CO and frankly, they don't need to. They'll walk in on their own and until the population reaches a point where they can be delisted, the USFWS is in full control.
Bob is correct. Donating to this group will not accomplish anything except make people feel good about throwing their hard earned money away. Like it or not, wolves are coming to Colorado. It won't be the result of a ballot initiative, though. It will be the result of them walking in themselves, which they've already begun doing.
Unfortunately, the feds are in charge of wolves. If Colorado passed a law tomorrow making wolves varmints, you still couldn’t shoot them. And equally unfortunate, it takes a minimum reproducing population within a state, or nationwide delisting to change that.
that photo above is really a good one. Gorgeous wolf.
The BHA comment was directed towards Stix. And, made simply because he questioned a "Hunting" Organization not being in support of this anti initiative. While giving his choice a free pass.
Wolves may well walk into Colorado....and eventually work their way across the state. That's not going to happen overnight. I'll take my chances with the walk-in potential versus immediate establishment out of the back of a truck any day.
Monster elk eating dog right there.
K
It’s worth the time to ask the usfws if a states ballot measure will force them to introduce wolves.
Nowiser I called BHA because Stix is a big fan boy of them and most things left wing. Also because BHA is a wolf in sheep clothing.
Bob, you state, "the USFWS did not want to established the wolf into Colorado". Then why did the USFWS want to expand the range of the Mexican wolf into Colorado even though Colorado was never part the Mexican wolf's historic range. This was attempted a few years back but the Governors of the three surrounding states told the USFWS, "hell no". And I do believe that Colorado might have been part of the Northern Rockies wolf project in the beginning.
Colorado does have a wolf plan under, ie, "let them wander in, as they are still protected by the USFWS as endangered species in Colorado. That can surely change when the USFWS delisted the wolf in the next year or two but there is NO NEED for a forced introduction, but the Pro-wolf group WANTs the wolf in their "historic range" regardless of Colorado's growing human population , regardless of the millions of dollars of sportsman's money spent to support the 10 big game species and scientific game management.
Colorado in 1940 when the wolf was eradicated, the population of Colorado was 1.2 million. We now have 5.7 million and within 20 years, that will increase to 8-10 million. Lets compare that to Montana's population of 1.5 million and Wyoming's 666,000 persons.
The Prowolfers WANT the wolf in Colorado, " they state," once established, the gray wolf will bring back the critical balance of nature to Colorado." As far as I know, Colorado's "Nature" in a good balance under the North American Conservation Model and sportsman's funding.
We are not going to give in to the pro-wolfers, and we are going to fight--against the forced introduction of the gray wolf from Colorado.
If anyone in the usfws had told me this measure would force the introduction of wolves, I would have donated a long time ago.
The Feds are in control of whether or not we get wolves? They are also in control of marijuana but somehow there are grows and pot shops all over Colorado with the States seal of approval.
So let's say the ballot initiative passes. Then what? Can the state just implement a plan to restore the wolves without the blessing of USFWS? Where would they procure the wolves to transplant?
Operatives in the USFWS, would be stumbling all over themselves to bring in those large robust Alberta wolfs, along with some from Alaska for genetic diversity. Don’t worry once the green light goes on there wouldn’t be any shortage of government assistance.
I don't see anywhere on "Stop the Wolf Coalition"'s website that tells me how they spend donated money. Red flag for me.
People knocking RMEF need to get a clue. Their position is quite clear, it has been in the press and their position is even mentioned on the STWC website, as well as RMEF's own website. As Brotsky said, what would you have them do?
One continues to hear, "well the wolf introduction has worked in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho, why not Colorado?
Here is one reason why not.
1. Montana's current human population== 1.03 million
2. Wyoming's current human population == 575,000
3. Idaho's population== 1.7 million
4. Colorado's current population== 5.7 million and growing
“The Endangered Species Act is broken.” Slowing down wolf-huggers every step of the way is required. Science no longer dictates predator policy in this country. The Yellowstone grizzly bear re-listing has changed the game forever!
To add to what Paul@thefort said: MT, WY, and ID allow wolf hunting. It seems highly unlikely to me that CO will every allow wolf hunting. That's the primary reason why it is so important to keep the wolves out of CO.
The only ones saying wolf introduction works in ID, MT, and WY, are the ones wanting wolves in CO.
Wolves are already in CO, and the state of CO will have zero say in their management until the population reaches the point of delisting, or, the USFWS delists wolves nationwide. Already been thru that here in OR.
The notion the CO can just do what they want because they legalized pot is wishful thinking. WY legalized grizzy bear hunting earlier this year, how's that worked out? As the former WY Attorney General said... "Commissioner Patrick Crank explained to his fellow board members that 230 years of case law supported the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which establishes the precedence of federal laws over state law. Crank says if the state authorized a grizzly hunt, hunters who killed bears could face federal prosecution."
As I mentioned earlier, CO should learn from their neighbors and get working on a wolf management plan that the feds will approve; your hands are tied without one.
Am I hearing I'm further ahead to save my donation and buy a shovel with it?
Thanks to all that have signed the petition. Keep spreading the word guys
I oppose this because people can't be trusted to handle wolf introduction in a reasonable manner. Knowing that, it would be a mistake to support another forced introduction.
Yes, I also selfishly dont want to lose any more opportunity than we already have lost to hunt in this state. It is selfish, but on the scale of who is being self serving in Colorado when it comes to wildlife, the average Joe who foots the bill and more often than not goes home with an unpunched tag is far from the top of the list. I want my kids to have a decent shot at decent opportunities. They will never have the situation I had here growing up (and took for granted) but there is still some great hunting to be had.
Wolves simply aren't a fit here anymore but even of they were, I wouldn't do anything to invite the human-caused drama and mismanagement that always accompanies them.
Bob, I’ve heard you state all that for a year now. I even agree with it. But, where I’m lost is how is that going to stop the reintroduction attempts? That is always your answer when people bring it up. So, explain your reasoning please
If I knew an approved ballot measure would force the USFWS to introduce wolves to CO, I would have already donated to an appropriate group. My conversation with the USFWS didn't lead me to that conclusion. Until I see some confirmation from the feds, the BGF motives remain suspect; I saw them in action with MT, ID, and the Simpson/Tester rider.
I signed it and hopefully many east coast hunters sign on. Ed
Thanks Bob. I understand totally. Times change though. There was a time the USFWS wasn't gong to reintroduce wolves to the greater Yellowstone Ecosystem either. So, getting ahead of something for a change might not be a bad idea. Plus, if they have no intentions of reintroduction, why does Colorado need a plan for wolf management for the USFWS to approve of?
Currently, before a state can take over management they need to have a plan that ensures a minimum population. They need to do that regardless of how wolves got to the state. In oregon that was a set number of breeding pairs. We also had to spell out how we would deal with problem wolves and still maintain that minimum level. Unfortunately, that minimum population has been a moving target; one of the problems you have when emotion or legislation, trumps biology.
A plan that ensures a minimum population doesn’t mean jack shit to liberal judges like Malloy. It took YEARS for the litigation process to play out and be allowed to tell jack wads like him that Wyoming’s Wolf Management Plan went above and beyond what was required from the get-go. Thank God for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia!
I see now Bob. And, it makes great sense once you explained it. To me and others, it makes great sense to try and win the public’s support. So, it’s a two way approach. Nothing wrong with covering all the bases.
If you cant keep CO states Gvt straight there is no chance you in CO can keep the Mule deer and Elk eaters out.
Need to spend your $ winning the state legislature, Gov and Congress seats back and fast.
K
October 2, 2019 Campaign Update: Greg Walcher Joins Colorado Stop the Wolf Coalition Former Club 20 President and Executive Director of Colorado’s Department of Natural Resources brings decades of experience to oppose forced wolf introduction in our state
“I have always supported reintroduction as an important tool to recover endangered species. I am proud that as Director of DNR, I was involved in the introduction of lynx, moose, bighorn sheep, prairie chickens, endangered fish, and many other species to Colorado.
But wolves are different, because they simply cannot peacefully coexist in a state with almost 6 million people. They would decimate other important wildlife, and their impact on rural areas could be devastating. Their forced introduction, against the advice of Colorado’s own wildlife experts, is a terrible idea.
Please join me to support the broad coalition at stopthewolf.org and ensure this apex predator is not forced in to a state where it would be so dangerous and disruptive,” said Greg Walcher.
“The addition of Greg Walcher to our team of experts is a huge win for people and wildlife that will be harmed if we allow the forced introduction of wolves. If Colorado listens to real experts like Mr. Walcher, and not the extremist special interests who are backing Initiative 107, we can protect our professionally managed ecosystem for all the enjoy,” stated Denny Behrens, Co-Chair of Colorado Stop the Wolf Coalition.
For more information and to get involved against Initiative 107, visit www.stopthewolf.org
Just hope to get enough people to make a stand before the wolves get here and disrupt all of sportsmen’s management efforts.
