Major point of Initiative 79
Colorado
As I read through Initiative 79, the major point and reason given to reintroduce the gray wolf to Colorado by the petitioners is (c) ie, Once restored to Colorado, Gray Wolves will help restore a critical balance in Nature.
Here I thought that with the DOW/CPW scientific game management approach, and the North American Conservation Model, the state was doing just that, "balancing nature and big game species to the existing habitat using hunter and fishing dollars and hunters as a tool to balance.
I am afraid the general public does not have a clue the status of game management in Colorado and maintaining the balance.
Am I wrong? my best, Paul
Most don't know. Many don't care.
"I am afraid the general public does not have a clue"
I am afraid the general public does not have a clue in general, much less game management...
Sadly, much of the population are not aware of the condition or game that even exist within the state.
They will play it on the fact the masses of voters on this issue are stupid and throw in some heartwarming videos of wolves playing and galavanting which as we all know are just more noble wild dogs...the profile of the wolf howling with a moon background they will hit all the right cylinders...
On the Front Range I'd say the huge majority don't know and don't care...yet. The campaigns will turn people one way or the other.
While the CPW Commission is on record apposing the reintroduction of the gray wolf in Colorado, I do not expect to hear anything from the Commission or the CPW staff, made public, and prior to the ballot initiative being finalized, their stance concerning the gray wolf. I hope I am proven wrong but then what can they say and where? Where are the "hug and hunter and fisherman funds when you need them" if funding a ad campaign is an issue.?
One might believe that, since all wildlife in Colorado belong to all of the state's residents, that the Commission will leave it up to "all residents" to make the decision, despite the Commission's objection to reintroduction.
When was the last time a State Ballot that received a majority vote, was not sighed by the Governor and also approved by the State Legislature?
This information should be at every trailhead, bike shop, backpacking shop, and the pictures on billboards across the state.
CPW, as the highest grossing hunting revenue generating F&W Department in North America, should use some of those funds that they charge to do the right thing for hunting. Even if they can not say anything.
Paul, Colorado Parks and wildlife officers are not allowed to voice there opinion on issues of this sort. That's what I been told from several of them. Yes I agree with you that the CPW should have advertisements on TV educating the general public in all aspect on wolves. Maybe the general public should watch National Geographic Wild and see a pack of 17 wolves chase a herd of Bison and drag down a young Bison. Maybe this would change some minds on reintroducing wolves and how they should be managed. The state of hunting is surly changing fast in Colorado, I hope we as hunters will be able to survive share our experience of the outdoors with the next generation.
Here's one on the impacts to livestock.
And, of course, wolves love to snuggle right up to Fido and Fifi...
Treeline these are the type of link's that should be posted in the Denver post and all local magazines so the general public understands what reintroducing wolves into Colorado means and the effect they will have on other wildlife within our state, then they can make their own opinion when it comes times to vote. Why can't our CPW put an add on tv like these links and show all sides of the wolf issue?
So reading through the US fish and wildlife service, US wide,overview/plan concerning the gray wolf being protected or delisted, I found this statement.
"An important factor in maintaining wolf populations is the native ungulate populations. Primary wild ungulate pray within the range of gray wolves in the gray wolf entity include deer and elk. Each State, within wolf occupied range for the gray wolf entity manages its wild ungulate populations to maintain sustainable populations for harvest by hunters. States employ an adaptive management approach that adjusts hunter harvest in response to changes in big game population numbers and trends when necessary, and depredation is one of the many factors considered when setting seasons.".
So this next sentence, as follows, is of concern as stated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. They go on to state the following.
"We know of no future condition that would cause a decline in ungulate populations significant enough to affect the status of gray wolves in the gray wolf entity."
In other words as I define this, Colorado that has the largest elk herd in the Rock Mts., the future looks bright for gray wolf reintroducton and expansion.
As someone else predicted, if the gray wolf establishes/expands in Colorado, there is no doubt that the wolf will kill as many elk as bowhunters now do, ie, around 6000 elk per year. Adjustment to hunter numbers/permits, you bet.
There is no mention of who supports the State Fish and Game departments.
Anyway, just trying to make some sense of all of this. my best, Paul
Also, I have a call to the Denver US Fish and Wildlife Regional Office asking to confirm or not, the statement I have heard that in a US Fish and Wildlife report, the statement was presented. ie, "that Colorado was not suited for the reintroduction of a gray wolf population", and if true, based on what?
Another thing that comes to mind concerning the reintroduction of the gray wolf to Colorado is who with make the FINAL decision when and if the ballot initiative is approved by voters. I would expect it will be the State Legislatures and the Governor. If so, these are the persons we need to contact and present our views on this issue as we might not be able to contact enough of the State's voters through various medias, for any change of mind- set, if in favor of reintroduction.
my best, Paul
Paul, this is not a reintroduction of a species that was previously here.
Please keep that straight.
The wolves they are wanting to bring are non-native northern grey wolves. Much larger and more aggressive than the southern Rockies wolves. This is the introduction of a non-native species.
Too bad they can’t just eat feral horses. Then die when all the feral horses are gone.
Roger, I under stand that.
Treeline...thanks for the links; great info!!!
Here is some interesting reading. ie, "Explanation of wolf resolution considered by Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission". Google search this title above for more wolf info.
"While surveys of Coloradans about wolves have reflected general public support for wolves living in Colorado, the cost of having and managing wolves will fall squarely upon farmers, ranchers and sportspersons. That fact must be considered when the future of wolves in Colorado is contemplated. Wolves and wolf management is costly, and currently no funding source to pay to support wolves has been identified. CPW has been cutting its budget, programs and staffing since 2008. The agency cannot afford to take on the management of wolves while maintaining existing program responsibilities that serve residents and visitors to Colorado. Without additional funding, or reductions in existing programs to compensate for the increased expense, efforts to actively release wolves into the state are not possible. No wolf advocacy group has stepped forward and offered to fund a wolf management program."
I thought this was an interesting paragraph in that read...
I guess the questions for me is, if the popular vote wins, is CPW forced to reintroduce wolves? Or can they override the popular vote by using this scientific information gathered and their professional belief of the situation? Or do they diminish the financial resource of Sportspersons, to obtain funds from the much larger eco-tourism group...? Unlike yellowstone's wolves reintroduction, CPW or prowolf groups are not going to have the deep pockets of the feds to support the effort this time...at least I don't think they would.
Thoughts?
If it passes, it effectively becomes "law" so CPW won't have a choice unless the legislature overturns it, which they won't.
There are some smart guys here, attorneys etc. What is holding back groups such as RMEF, RMBS, and or the CDOW (as an example) from putting a lawsuit in place which would hold up the introduction if passed citing issues such as endangered species at risk, recovering herds such as sheep and moose etc?
We’ve seen many lawsuits blocking seasons openings for predators what’s stopping hunting organizations from doing the same if it makes it to the ballot and passes?
Same goes for the DOW, they don’t have to comment on it, but if they are opposed to it like we’ve seen with the cat situation what is stopping them from striking a lawsuit blocking introduction based on recovery programs in place?
Chad, I don't think the State can sue themselves, but they might be able to file for an injunction based upon a number of factors.. But the organizations you mention sure can, as can the stockmen, outfitters assn, There will be several lawsuits filed seeking injunctive relief, all with different reasoning behind them. You can count on that. Our side can go judge shopping and find like-minded judges, just like their side does. That's why I believe it could be decades before anything happens, even if it passes.
If you want to see who is behind this, google search, Darlene Kobobel of Teller City Colorado. While she is not the head of the snake, she is part of it and a convenient co-filer of Initiative 79. I could not find any info on the other co-filer, Gail Bell.
I just spoke with the USFWS wolf regional coordinator in Wyoming and he stated that the Service will be filing to delist the wolf across the US since the two major wolf recovery areas populations (Great Lakes and Northern Rockies) have been reached. That filing will be in March of 2020.
I then asked him if there would be opposition to the delisting through law suits and by who. He stated the pro wolf organizations do not want them delisted because once the states have control, a wolf season can/may be established when needed.
We know now that the state of Minnesota just banned the hunting of wolves through the State Legislature on very narrow vote.
I ask him if the USFWS had ever targeted Colorado for the forced re-introduction of wolves, he stated no. While there might be some suitable habitat for wolves, his opinion was that Colorado would not be a place for reintroduction but that was not in his control.
We spoke about social media and its effect on mass decision making and getting out the word and that the pro wolf organization use this to their benefit.
Hard to believe that enough or the right kind of info concerning why bring wolves into Colorado is a bad thing,can be executed in time to the mass of people who have been convinced that wolves will be good and will help "restore a critical balance in (Colorado's) nature." I would also expect that the majority of Colorado's hunters do not even know this issue be being brought forth and why.
Paul, they'll know a lot more about it about next August when the serious political campaign starts. At this point I don't believebthe Secretary of State has approved the submission for the ballot....yet...
Also, we spoke of the wolf being the "poster child" for the prowolf groups and the support brings is a lot of funding $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for their cause.
Lou, I believe you are correct to this point.
