Nm votes to support the federal wolf recovery program

Disappointing. I'm not 100% against wolves but I've seen what happened with Grizz where they have now recovered but are still on the ESA. I really hope they have a end goal and stand behind it so as soon as they hit the number the feds/ESA want, we can delist and manage them. Otherwise I'm betting their disappointed in how many are lost to the SSS method.
 
Kiss elk tags in the southern part of the state good bye.

From what I can tell the USFW did not agree to turn over management of wolves to the states when the goal is reached.
 
The true goal of the wolf huggers is to have wolves manage herd numbers and have no need for hunting. I don't care how many wolves they get they still won't have enough, they will say lets expand to new habitat. And the dumb ass urban dwelling idiots will applaud it.
Even SSS won't stem the tide. But I will do my best.
Jack
 
Jack is absolutely correct that is the true call of the wolf huggers... I really don't see how the hunters and ranchers are ever going to end up on top of this deal. I'm truly at a loss
 
I've said the same thing as cosmic for years.

Wolves are an anti measure pure & simple.

If they TRULY were concerned about establishing iconic animals to their historic ranges they'd be pushing bison. But they don't. It's only wolves & grizzly.

This is disheartening news indeed.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-26-17 AT 07:55AM (MST)[p]Sorry bro, but there is absolutely ZERO evidence that bison ever roamed in the Gila.....EVER.

Bison roamed east of the Rio Grande in New Mexico, but at present with all the allotment boundaries that we have, and the checkerboard state trust, blm and private lands, you would NEVER be able to establish a true migrating herd of bison again. At least not without ranchers bitching about all the fences that are getting torn down.

They used to graze an area and migrate thousands of miles away, returning to a previously visited area years after they last were there. Don't try to argue that cattle are filling this niche today. They are not. Not even close.

But again, there is zero evidence that bison ever roamed in the Gila.
 
It would be great if you guys showed up to these commission meetings to make your voice heard. I was at the meeting and not a single concerned hunter spoke. I heard from cattle growers and a bunch of hippy women.

Had you shown up to the meeting...or streamed it online...you would be well informed about what truly is happening. NM pulled out of the wolf program a few years ago because the plan had no metric for recovery. They blocked new releases because there was no metric for recovery. The new plan states that 320 wolves must exist between NM and Arizona in order for recovery at which point the states will take over management and we might actually get to hunt them.

Here is the thing....wolves are here and there is not a whole lot we can do about it. Your game commission realized that. As commissioner Ryan stated, we need to have a seat at the table. NMDGF and the commission will provide feedback to the USFW regarding this plan. You, as a member of th public can submit your comments to the USFW until August 29. You can also contact your commissioner.

At 3-4 wolves per 1000 elk, we should not see a significant effect on the elk population. I know some of you have been on the ground and say the herd has already been decimated. Population estimates and harvest reports (published on the NMDGF website) don't necessarily corroborate this. I have had 2 16A elk hunts in 4 years and had great success. Your NMDGF biologists closely monitor these herds. Commissioner Espinoza expressed his concern about the elk population being affected by wolves. The chief of wildlife for NMDGF stated that there is language in the draft recovery plan that says that if there is unacceptable impact to an ungulate population the wolves can be managed accordingly.

I'm not pro-wolf. I'm not anti-wolf either. Im an engineer. I'm pro-science. I have talked to biologists. I have read documentation. I have asked questions. This is not ideal but the research behind it is sound at this point. All of this documentation is available online...the draft plan, population estimates, harvest reports, commission minutes. Stop being keyboard warriors!! Do your research. Be informed. And for crying out loud, attend the meetings. Make your voice heard.
 
Geeze, I've never met anyone who is anti-science, so if I call it science, it will justify all my crap. Japanese using Korean POWs as human guinea pigs was just innocent science.
I've got some pills here that are guaranteed to cure your sex life and make your acne go away. It's science, so how could anyone argue? ;-)
 
Great response. I'm not talking about ethics though. If you have evidence contrary to what is presented, these public meetings are a great avenue to do so. A well thought out argument goes a long way. My point is, talking on these message boards does a great job of convincing people something they already know.
 
I do agree on the point made we need make it a point to attend these meetings. Even if attendance was high for hunters or ati-wolf people all words fall upon deaf ears in these meetings . The feds are going to keep sinking millions into this mangy mutt project no matter what evidence is brought forward to prove it's not in the best interests of our herds ,or people that live in the heart of wolf country . Kids have been attacked , livestock slaughtered , and still all falls on deaf ears . People are gonna end up reaching the end of their ropes and getting in trouble for shooting these worthless mutts that have no business being brought in here in the first place .
 
Please tell me, what exactly is the problem that science is trying to fix here? Too many deer, too many elk, and too many antelope? There are simple ways to remedy that that don't involve wolves.

Is the problem that there used to be more wolves than there are now? Is that a bad thing?

Science also tells us that the tyrannosaurs used to roam around New Mexico, but they're unfortunately gone now. I propose we appropriate a bunch of taxpayer money to form a coalition to bring back the tyrannosaurus rex. They used to be here, and they're obviously not here now, so that must be a problem similar to the wolves not being here now, and we need to use science to fix the problem.

Or maybe, this isn't really about science?
 
I appreciate your response. One thing that was stated at this meeting was that the state of NM wants no adult wolves released. These wolves have been habituated and used to humans feeding them. They end up being problem dogs. They have a 25% survival rate. However, cross fostering pups into the den results in higher survival (50% survival) and less human harassment. Hopefully this decreases the chance of wolf-human interaction.

I do agree that it is unacceptable for wolves to be attacking kids. Can you please provide information about this? I have heard of wolves hanging around areas where kids are but did not know of any reported attacks.

We aren't happy because of the potential damage these wolves can do to our elk hunting opportunities. The crazy wolf ladies are pissed because 320 wolves is not enough. No one is winning anything here. I guess in my opinion we have no choice but to help until the population can be managed by the state at which point, I would love to legally shoot a wolf. A Mexican wolf pelt would look great in my house.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-26-17 AT 04:16PM (MST)[p]I feel like you took one thing out of my post....that I'm pro-science. The point was attend the meetings if you don't want wolves around. I heard from three cattle growing organizations at the meeting, three ladies wearing wolf shirts, and the defenders of wildlife.

Regarding science...or scientific evidence...I was simply saying the numbers USFW is proposing, is 3-4 wolves per 1000 elk. According to research, this should have minimal effect on the elk population. This is what was stated at the commission meeting. If you have evidence that states differently you should have attended the meeting and presented that. Or get a degree in wildlife science and work for game and fish.

EDIT: I have no idea what science is trying to solve. That was never my point. It's federal land. It's owned by the federal government, funded by our tax dollars. They decided to reintroduce Mexican wolves to their native range. I'm glad we have public land to hunt on. I'm sure the wolf ladies are happy to have wolves to howl with. If wolves can be there without affecting my elk hunts, then great.
 
Mozey of coarse its not about science. Its about these hippy wolf huggers getting there way. Tyrannosaurs is some what to old I think Saber Toothed Tigers would be much better. I will bring it up at the next Hugger Game Commission meeting.
Jack
 
Atyourcervix
How do you propose to have 3 or 4 Wolves stay with a herd of 1000 Elk.... Train them to STAY ? Your line of thought is totally asinine
They kill those Elk and move on. Look at Wyoming
Jack
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-26-17 AT 05:01PM (MST)[p]Holy #####! AtYourCervix. Let's do name calling.

If you have evidence of specific wolf behavior you should have gone to the meeting to share. Thank you for proving my point.

3-4 wolves per 1000 elk. Population estimates. Ratios. Statistics. You have taken this straight retarded.
 
This will be my last comment on this tread. I get so mad and frustrated with hunters that by into the pro wolf propaganda, hook line and sinker its TOTAL BS
This is what will really happen. When they reach the target number of wolves in the Gila, management won't be turned over to the State they will tie it up in court for 10 years.... meanwhile the the wolf population doubles. Now they are in the San Mateos so they will spend 5 years thinking about that.... now they are in the Sacrmentos, The Jemez and the Sangre De Cristos.And all this time the Canadian Timber wolves have spread through Colorado moving south.
You think its OK for Elk and wolves to live in harmony and not effect your hunting....its simply impossible. There was a reason the OLD TIMERS got rid of wolves. I'm and old timer now and it breaks my heart that my grand kids won't have the same hunting that I had because we let the feel good huggers make the rules.
 
No wonder we don't win any arguments! look how we argue amongst each other. For all that want the wolf gone, lets not forget that at one point and time there were zero elk left in this state. Ranchers wanted them gone so they didn't compete with their animals. who wants to give all of our public lands to the state? Ranches. Ranches are an extremely powerful lobby throughout the west, most western states they are directly responsible for keeping elk numbers down. I am not sure why we treat them like they are some ally in this fight.
Wolfs will not destroy hunting. IF wolfs did this nobody would going to Alaska and BC to go hunting. furthermore the states that have plenty of wolves have plenty of elk. You can, every year go and buy over the counter tags and hunt them. A ton of more opportunity that we have here. maybe, if we are lucky we can then hunt the stupid wolves, giving us in NM even more hunting opportunities.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-26-17 AT 08:24PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Aug-26-17 AT 08:23?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Aug-26-17 AT 08:20?PM (MST)

LT... You are full of #####... it was the ranchers that brought back the Elk. Elk from the Vermijo Ranch repopulated the entire state. Read some history you MORON ! And you are a Troll go spew your BS somewhere else. The Elk were killed off by market hunters to feed settlers.

Jack
 
Extremes are bad. In almost every aspect of life, extremes are bad. Balance typically makes most sense and is more sustainable regardless of the subject. I THINK that makes most sense here as well. You can bury your head in the sand and think that one day there won't be any wolves in New Mexico, but is that realistic? I don't think so. The wolf folks may want to think that eventually there will be wolves running around like coyotes, but is that realistic? I don't think so. I think that the best, ACHIEVABLE, reality is one of balance, based on science and management just like the rest of our wildlife populations.

Is that most ideal if you are a hunter or rancher? No. But is it the worst? No.

All the reports of zero calves in the Gila are surely exaggerated. Just be realistic, we as hunters will never be taken seriously if we let emotions rule all of our conversations. And seriously, the name calling is not needed. We all want good elk hunting, period.

Hunt Hard. Shoot Straight. Kill Clean. Apologize to No One.
 
AtYourCervus, You're right--I did take that one thing out of your post, because that was the part that really annoyed me. Where I work I hear scientists say similar crap all the time. They assume that once they put that statement out there, they're entitled to mock anyone that might challenge their crap. Scientists are not infallible, and sometimes they're even intentionally bad, so yes, that is a particular pet peeve of mine.

Otherwise, I don't really have an issue with your main point, even though I think you're a little naive for believing that a bunch of us hunters showing up at those meetings will actually change anyone's preconceived prejudice. I believe that the crazy wolf ladies are just pawns. Because we've already lost the propaganda battle, whatever we might say will be put in the context of mean heartless men picking fights with poor innocent well-meaning ladies. How does that help the cause?

But, I actually hope you prove me wrong, so please, carry on.

About the only thing we can do is to be more careful about who we vote for to represent us, but so far we've done a crappy job of that too.
 
A few good points. Science and numbers work for the most part. Name calling on a forum is childish at best and solves zero problems. We as hunters will never win against the state, government or institutions that are trying to reinstate anything. Yes we have a voice but that is all. It may be heard but it will do no good. The biggest problem with reintroducing wolves, as has already been stated, is not the fact that there will be wolves. It is the fact that once the numbers that make whoever happy are reached that any means to legally manage the wolf population will be tied up in court for years, because that's how New Mexico is. And anybody that has lived in the state for any decent amount of time knows this. But I believe wolves will get out of hand just like it has in other states.
 
AYC
I went to allot of meetings before we had the wolf problems, trying to save our Deer Herds from to many Lions and Coyotes and you know what ? it fell on PC deaf ears and look what happened.... our Deer have all but disappeared. Now we move on to Elk. That's what is totally retarded. They only listen to the pro predator PC crowd.
Jack
 
Cosmic_Cowboy,

All great points. Very well articulated argument.

Just a few things. While the Vermijo Ranch did help with the elk, they had to go get elk from somewhere. So in 1911 they got some elk from Colorado. Because that was not enough and because the ranch was private looking only to generate revenue from hunting, the Federal Gov. then brought elk from Yellowstone. This second infusion of elk is what helped the southern part of the state. As far as the Gila area of the state. We largely have AZ and the Yellowstone to thank.
I would hardly consider this " Ranch " helping. This property, for the last 115 years has and continue to owned by the wealthiest men in the world.

As someone that wants Wolves properly managed, I would ask that you continue to be the mouthpiece of the opposition. You have such a rational and easygoing way about you.
 
LT
The problem is there is not two sides... the pro wolf people ALWAYS get what they want. So I can rave and rant all I want will make no difference. Looked up yer name..... Mike Wolf LMFAO
Jack
 
For the record I was generalizing that across the west, none of the huggers are pushing to reintroduce bison (or bighorn, turkey, elk, etc) all they want to push is predators: wolves & griz.

And while I recognize that reintroducing bison would be all but impossible given their propensity to destroy fences as they roam, etc., it's no more ludicrous than reintroducing wolves or griz but the huggers are all for that.


Carl
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-28-17 AT 11:37AM (MST)[p]Am I missing something here? All of this is occurring on National Forest Land. Unfortunately the pro-wolf people have as much right to the land as the cattle grazers and the hunters right?

I hate when I am trying to put a sneak on a group of elk and a group of f-in cows act like idiots and spook the elk. I hate stepping around cow s$%t while trying to keep my eyes in front of me. I do enjoy the occasional green chile cheeseburger but I would prefer if there weren't cattle grazing allotments on MY National Forest. The sole purpose of these National Forests are not for hunters. They aren't solely for campers. They aren't solely for tree huggers. I know sharing was taught back in kindergarten and it's easy to forget, but we sound like kids saying the forest is only for us.

"Land of Many Uses"...if you don't like it you should move to Texas where I guarantee they wont reintroduce wolves...and you wont get to enjoy public lands either.

Maybe I trust NMDGF too much and that they will actually do something if the wolf population affects the elk herd. Am I wrong in that assumption? They said there would be language in the recovery plan. NMDGF and the commission stopped new releases in 2011 when USFWS wouldn't provide a metric for recovery. They pulled out of the wolf program for the same reason.

I guess I am hoping the pro wolf people will share their wolves with my 30-06 once they are recovered but it sounds like that's probably just a pipe dream.
 
Population estimates show about 87,000 elk in the core occupied elk range (COER). There are 16 hunting units outside of the COER. According to last years population estimates there are about 28,000 elk in the wolf recovery area.
 
ATC -

While i read this i will say you do make many valid points no arguing that .. However i will also say in reading your pissing match post with the hunters you 100% come off as the greenies trying to put the wolves in the forest this is for us hunters that have an issue with the libtard agenda and the greenies that try to invoke it. From the outside looking in i would have to eg you for someone involved in the program
 
Funny you say that...I was a little afraid of coming off that way. I'm actually right in the middle. I would say I side with NMDGF more than anything else. Allow the population to recover and then manage it for hunters. Everyone is happy. Greenies get to howl with the wolves. I get to hunt elk and wolves (hopefully).

I hunt just as much as everyone else on here. I have an oryx hunt that starts this weekend. I have a deer hunt in October. I have an elk hunt in November. I have a GSP that I take bird hunting. I love blasting squirrels with my .22.

I am proud to live in a country where we don't just let things die off anymore. I think it's actually kinda cool. We conserve wild populations on a very vast (and wild) landscape. I am glad that I get the opportunity to hunt it. I will eat my words if these wolves destroy our elk population but I trust NMDGF to manage both populations accordingly.
 
I was born & raised in Alasks. We had plenty wolves and plenty of grizzlies. I am not against ANY native species (and even some exotics: Barbary, oryx, ibex).

However, the problem with wolves (and griz) is that thanks to the huggers' lawsuits, they may well NEVER be managed.

In Alaska there are wolf seasons and grizzly seasons. They are managed for the most part based on biolical decisions. Here in the Lower 48 wolves and griz are managed by litigation and touchy-feely idealisms that are not based on facts.

If one could GUARANTEE that wolves would be managed I wouldn't be opposed, but it has been proven time and again in multiple states that no mater what recovery goal is reasched, litigation stalls management & hunting. And native game animals: moose, deer, elk all suffer for it.

I'm all for wolves, griz, black bears, coyotes, etc. But at the end of the day if it comes down to me eating elk meat or a wolf eating elk meat, I'll choose me every time. Call me selfish for desiring organic grass-fed wholesome lean protien for me and my family.
 
I guess another question. Again my thoughts come from (and I know I will catch heat for saying this) a science perspective.

Why would the feds put a ton of wolves onto the landscape...so many wolves that, as many of you say, they will destroy the elk population? I am assuming that will be their primary food source. The wolves kill off their primary food source and they will die of starvation. The smart thing to do would be to have a sustainable wolf and elk population that can be managed accordingly. Am I missing something? This is not a new concept as far as I know.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-28-17 AT 02:27PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Aug-28-17 AT 02:26?PM (MST)

AYC, if you don't think the reintroduction/wolf recovery program is purely an agenda driven by money and social/emotional legislation, then you are as naive as my lingerie model wife that thinks every man she meets just wants to be her "friend".

Additionally, as a hunter and/or conservationist, you should realize the landscape can only handle so many predators. The one stupidly obvious thing that often gets left out of the wolf/predator argument is MAN. Just look at the amount of habitat we have removed through development over the last 100 years. I'm a homebuilder, I work in the industry. That doesn't mean I'm naive to the fact that thousands of acres of habitat are lost every year due to commercial and residential development. Development is going to happen, there's no if/ands/buts about it. So when you combine the impact man has on wildlife (and I'm not even talking about hunting) with an increase in predators, something is going to suffer (i.e. elk, deer, sheep, etc.)

When you speak about sustainable populations, the state wildlife agencies are currently doing what they think is necessary to have sustainable populations. However, when you introduce or increase predator populations everything changes.

The state of New Mexico issued 21,862 elk tags in this years draw. If you take the objective wolf population of 320 and multiply it by the amount of elk that studies show wolves kill (1.8 elk per wolf per month), then the amount of elk annually killed by wolves would be 6,912. That's now 6,912 less elk the wildlife agencies have to account for when issuing tags. So simple math says there would need to be a reduction in elk tags of a minimum of 30% to stay at the same "sustainable population" levels we are at today. (And yes, I'm aware harvest percentages, private land tags, gray wolf vs. mexican wolf, and other things are factors, but I'm just keeping it simple here).

The point is, we are currently at "sustainable populations" for the most part. Introducing or increasing the predator population will significantly reduce the amount of opportunity for hunters if we try to maintain these same "sustainable populations". That is why hunters are (for the most part) anti-wolf. The bottom line is most people accept the predator/prey ratios as they are today. But when someone tries to tip the scales in favor of the predators, it changes the landscape and the ones that suffer the most are hunters and ranchers.
 
LAST EDITED ON Aug-28-17 AT 03:54PM (MST)[p]Thanks. Very well thought out argument. To date I do not think there has been a decrease in elk tags available based on wolves in the recovery area but can probably look at the draw odds for the past few years to figure that out.

Only thing I would argue with is that your numbers are based on 320 wolves. That 320 number is across both New Mexico and Arizona. Lets just say for arguments sake that they split evenly. I guess just cut your numbers in half...that 6912 becomes 3456. Once again the population in the recovery area is estimated to be 28,000. I took that from the 2016 Harvest Information Report. At your rate, wolves will kill 12% of the elk population based on current population estimates. According to the same Harvest Information Report, hunters took 3156 elk...11%. I do not anticipate that bear, coyote or lion will have a significant affect on the adult elk population but lets call it 2% (560 elk) for arguments sake and ease. In one year, that is 25% of the elk population, or 7000 elk.

Looking at the bull:cow:calf (33:100:30) ratios, the distribution would be 5668 bulls, 17177 cows, and 5153 calves. Looks to me like our elk herd would decrease by almost 2000 elk per year. Let's keep in mind that the success of any ungulate population depends on the success of females since multiple females can be bred by a single male. If NMDGF decreases anything, my guess is it will be antlerless tags.

This is very simplified and based on 1 year of data. I'm sure someone who is a wildlife biologist has thought about this alot more than I have. I think a population decrease of 2k per year might be tough to rebound from but once again, I'm not a biologist, and this is based on one year. At first glance, 30% calf recruitment seem a little low. Bears? Coyotes? How does calf recruitment vary from year to year?

I guess my point in all this was that hunters need to come to these meetings armed with something tangible. Being pissed off and saying "our elk are going to be decimated because" is not a good argument. And arguing like a bunch of middle school girls makes us look worse. We have population estimates, we have ratios, how can we make it look like we need it to?? I'm not a greenie. I'm just an a$$hole who wants to hunt. But I'm trying to be realistic here.
 
Man this post blew up quick .. I'm going to put up one statement that sums up this whole argument.....ONLY WOLVES IN NEW MEXICO SHOULD BE DEAD WOLVES. BIG FAT PERIOD!!!!
 
So, when you give this math lesson at the next meeting, what is going to be their response? Cut back on wolves or hunters?

Here's a hint: it ain't going to be the wolves.

It's not realistic to believe the feds/pro-wolfies are going to compromise on this. Their true endgame is to eliminate hunting.

Also, it's not just the elk. Deer and antelope (especially muleys) are being decimated.

It would be awesome if you were to prove me wrong.
 
>Man this post blew up quick
>.. I'm going to put
>up one statement that sums
>up this whole argument.....ONLY WOLVES
>IN NEW MEXICO SHOULD BE
>DEAD WOLVES. BIG FAT PERIOD!!!!
>


+1
 
I talked to a government worker named Dewey. At my camp in 2015 in 16D.A so called government trapper from the San Carlos Reservation.He was using rubber lined traps to try and collar new wolves that were born in the wild.

I asked how many he has collared."he said zero".The new crop is wild as hell compare to there fence fed parents.And hes been out there trapping 2 years.They just don't come into his sets.Prefer elk.
 
>Hey y'all guess what.....Friday is September
>1st!
>
>Hunt Hard. Shoot Straight. Kill Clean.
>Apologize to No One.


+1 ?
 
I worked that commission meeting and have to say , hardly any of the wolf groups showed up compared to other meetings, very weird since it was in ABQ.I even joked with a couple of them and they said they dont know what happened as an email had gone out a month earlier and that maybe they need to send mass emails the week of......But , just the same,NO HUNTERS SHOWED UP! Everyone has a voice and a heated opinion, but given the opportunity to show support of or against , and NOTHING - NO ONE SHOWED UP except a few outfitters and ranchers! Remember that the next time wolfs are on the agenda , everyone has a solution , is the arm chair expert , has heated anger towards the NMDGF.....THEN SHOW UP! And for crying out loud , stop arguing with each-other, SAME TEAM!!!!
 

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_0255.jpeg
Huge Muley
Big Nevada Buck.jpeg
20231119_202707.jpg
2A73FA5B-2935-4964-BE25-6932A661EE5B.jpeg
E937252D-8A85-4477-9FE6-3D1EC48948F7.jpeg
Tall Trophy Muley
Screenshot_20220907_153018.jpg
4835458C-B154-4FB2-B639-B5962AFEC30B.jpeg
2875F234-6E7D-4C13-B2DE-12250A017A07.jpeg
Elk8.jpg
IMG_1867.png

New Mexico Guides & Outfitters

H & A Outfitters

Private and public land hunts since 1992 for elk, mule deer, sheep, pronghorn, black Bear & lion hunts.

505 Outfitters

Public and private land big game hunts. Rifle, muzzleloader and archery hunts available. Free Draw Application Service!

Sierra Blanca Outfitters

Offering a wide array of hunt opportunities and putting clients in prime position to bag a trophy.

Urge 2 Hunt

Hunts in New Mexico on private ranches and remote public land in the top units. Elk vouchers available.

Mangas Outfitters

Landowner tags available! Hunt big bulls and bucks. Any season and multiple hunt units to choose from.

Back
Top Bottom