$18M cost to control elk herd? Insane.

dryflyelk · May 26, 2006

Check out this article.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060523/ap_on_sc/elk_thinning
Somehow we are all going to end up paying with tax dollars for this park to "thin the herd". I'm almost certain that they could come up with other ways (us) to thin the herd for free. We would even PAY to hunt these animals. I'm sure any one of us would jump at that chance. They scream "no hunting" and then they pay guys to come in at night to kill the elk when nobody is watching. That's just great.
Thoughts?

30inchbuck · May 26, 2006

You can go to this web site and put public comments on the national park web site about this currently they are taking public comments before a plan is established.

Below is the comments I sent to them.

-

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectId=11012

There are millions of hunters that have contributed to the boom of the Elk Herds throughout the US. They have donated money, bought equipment, paid license fees ect. We contribute more money into wildlife than any other group.

Let hunters control the population.

With license fees and maybe even some sort of access fee to the Park this would only generate more funds to accomplish other projects in the Park. Instead of spending money it could generate money.

I would also say that if you all are afraid of the PETA people of this country ? Remember this the hunting, NRA group has more members and more political power than the PETA people have ever thought of having.

RudeDog · May 26, 2006

I think that we are all in agreement that this plan is not just bad but expensive. There are plenty of other options that as stated earlier would be a cash generater to the Park.

If we really want to see this change we need to be contacting our congressmen. The park personal has clearly stated in this and other articles that the only way that hunting can be allowed in a national park is through congressional intervention. Similiar to the actions taken on Sant Ana island off California.
http://news.corporate.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/05-04-2006/5132000bfdbae4f5.html

So on some level at least a precedent has been set. It just is going to take a lot more than a bunch of letters to a guy with his hands tied. We need to be expressing these ideas to the people who can actually affect change.

To contact your Senators click here and put in your zip code on the left side

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

To contact your represetative click here and follow the search instructions (kinda a pain)

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Would love to see just how much we really can influence thsi decision.

ktg · May 26, 2006

How about one of our MM members who's good with them there fancy words write up a letter that we can each send to our congressmen from the above links.

grizzlyplumber · May 29, 2006

"wolves would best meet environmental objectives and DO THE LEAST DAMAGE" ???????? what the hell are these people smoking?

feddoc · May 29, 2006

link to a fox news video. Typical response on camera by someon who favors introduction of wolves to control the problem.

Probably doesn't care about local livestock.

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/launc...ional&-1&Population Control&Video Launch Page

dbltrbl · May 30, 2006

IMHO

Why not do this with a youth and disabled hunt. Let the ANTI's have their protest. Heck no matter how the herd is controlled they will complain.

I for one would volunteer to help with the hunt. Once the herd starts getting shot at they learn that humans equate danger and will tend to avoid them.

Ooopps I forget the feds are running this so money will solve everything.