cpw predator control

FWIW, I posted this link on another hunting forum and it didn't raise an eyebrow. I was surprised that CPW actually expected the program to be implemented with the way it was presented to the Front Range public in the Denver Post a couple weeks ago:

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/2...ears-mountain-lions-to-boost-deer-population/

Last I heard the DP was running a public opinion poll on the program and as expected it wasn't doing too good.

Ultimately the CPW is not here to make the public happy! They are here to use biology to manage wildlife!

I am certain lots of the animal rights groups will be upset, but many of the hunting groups will support! Ultimately we are all to busy hunting right now to worry much!

>Ultimately the CPW is not here
>to make the public happy!
>They are here to use
>biology to manage wildlife!
>


I wish I could agree elks, but if this were true we'd still be hunting bears over bait in the spring and with hounds. Unfortunately biology is often removed in managing our wildlife, as they yield to public opinion. Now we have a recurring bear problem every summer and fall and now they're blaming it on "global warming". If we started baiting and hound hunting again, the g&p wouldn't have to "destroy" so many bears annually.

I saw two bears this past season where I've never seen a bear in this particular unit....EVER.

>Ultimately the CPW is not here
>to make the public happy!
>They are here to use
>biology to manage wildlife!


I'm going to remember you said that next time you start a thread titled "Fed up with the CPW!" ;-)

So my take is CPW (like other agencies involved in natural resources) is always vulnerable to social/political influence and wildlife is often managed for the loudest public. This is why Gunnison will never have a GMU managed like 76. Or why logging was virtually financially unfeasible on the GMUG for the last 15 years until the public saw the beetle kill.

Likewise in this situation, this is the predator era where the general urban public loves its predators while rural areas put up with the interactions and burdens of these animals. So while hunters fight amongst themselves and fawn survival plummets, fern feelers raise the public outcry on their vision of how rural areas should be. Then the rest of us are left with the Front Range vision of rural CO. So when the predator prey balance becomes unbalanced, the only predators that will be reduced will be our hunting tags. And the humane society will say that is the predator/prey balance that has been going on for thousands of years. Kind of sucks in my mind.

>>Ultimately the CPW is not here
>>to make the public happy!
>>They are here to use
>>biology to manage wildlife!
>>
>
>
>I wish I could agree elks,
>but if this were true
>we'd still be hunting
>bears over bait in the
>spring and with hounds. Unfortunately
>biology is often removed in
>managing our wildlife, as they
>yield to public opinion. Now
>we have a recurring bear
>problem every summer and fall
>and now they're blaming it
>on "global warming". If we
>started baiting and hound hunting
>again, the g&p wouldn't have
>to "destroy" so many bears
>annually.

No you are wrong. It was not the CPW (DOW) who moved to ban the spring bear hunts. It was a ballot measure. So the legislation did and not the CPW. If CPW had thier way there would be no spring bear hunt ban, no leg hold trap ban, no hound ban, etc. As these are all tools that allow them to manage game.

Sorry but that is not the issue.

>>Ultimately the CPW is not here
>>to make the public happy!
>>They are here to use
>>biology to manage wildlife!
>
>
>I'm going to remember you said
>that next time you start
>a thread titled "Fed up
>with the CPW!" ;-)
>

Well they usually use good biology and Science. I still cannot beleive they went through one of the worst winters in year in the NW and still upped the deer tags. Sorry but the science did not add up on that decision. Especially when they I asked if there were 10% more bucks this spring then there were the year before. Sorry but it was the wrong move and this years stats will end up showing it. Just like when they did not cut tags enough after the 07/08 years.

I will admit they have to balance the science with income....

>So my take is CPW (like
>other agencies involved in natural
>resources) is always vulnerable to
>social/political influence and wildlife is
>often managed for the loudest
>public. This is why
>Gunnison will never have a
>GMU managed like 76.
>Or why logging was virtually
>financially unfeasible on the GMUG
>for the last 15 years
>until the public saw the
>beetle kill.
>
>Likewise in this situation, this is
>the predator era where the
>general urban public loves its
>predators while rural areas put
>up with the interactions and
>burdens of these animals.
>So while hunters fight amongst
>themselves and fawn survival plummets,
>fern feelers raise the public
>outcry on their vision of
>how rural areas should be.
> Then the rest of
>us are left with the
>Front Range vision of rural
>CO. So when the
>predator prey balance becomes unbalanced,
>the only predators that will
>be reduced will be our
>hunting tags. And the
>humane society will say that
>is the predator/prey balance that
>has been going on for
>thousands of years. Kind
>of sucks in my mind.
>

This is exactly why we must pass Amendment 71. I posted about this amendment and no one even commented. Hell even our sports groups are silent.

Very well put chindits! There is too much lag time between biological/science inputs and the resultant regulation changes. Some units they issue leftover tags long after the game is stamped out.