Wolves are back in Colorado

COHunter

Active Member
Messages
662
Wolf turns up dead along I-70
By Theo Stein
Denver Post Staff Writer


Tuesday, June 08, 2004 -

A young wolf from a Yellowstone pack was found dead along Interstate 70 west of Idaho Springs on Saturday, the first confirmed wild wolf in Colorado in 69 years.

The appearance of the female wolf, designated No. 293, was confirmation that Yellowstone wolves, reintroduced in 1995, are attempting to establish new territories hundreds of miles from home.

Wolves have been sighted in southern Wyoming for the past two years, but 293's appearance so deep into Colorado astounded even one of the country's top wolf biologists.

Experts said the female probably was hit by a car during an unsuccessful search for a mate.

"It's not uncommon for young wolves traveling long distances to end up getting killed by people," said Yellowstone wolf biologist Douglas Smith. "I'm just surprised she survived the human gauntlet as far as she did."

The dead wolf was found along the north side of I-70 just five days before the Colorado Division of Wildlife holds its first meeting of a group that will attempt to hammer out an acceptable management plan for the pack-living predator.

Her discovery is likely to further polarize the continuing debate about wolves. Opinion polls taken in 1994 and 2001 showed that a steady 66 percent of Coloradans favor the wolf's return. But many Western Slope residents resent support for what they believe is a threat to their lifestyle.

The wandering wolf was born in 2003 to one of Yellowstone's most successful packs, the Swan Lake Pack, on the park's northern border. This year she reached the age where young wolves typically leave - or are driven - from their home pack.

Wolf 293 had on a radio collar and was last located by biologists with telemetry equipment on Jan. 15 near Mammoth Hot Springs on the Montana border.

In the past two weeks, the Colorado Division of Wildlife received two reports of a lone, wolflike animal wearing a collar. The first sighting was in late May south of Yampa. A second report came from Gore Pass, just a few days before 293 was found dead.

"We don't know if it was a dog with a collar or a wolf- dog hybrid, or a wolf," said DOW spokesman Todd Malmsbury.

Ed Bangs, the Northern Rockies Wolf Project leader, said the female had two broken legs, which suggested she had been hit as she tried to cross the highway.

Bangs said the corpse was being sent to the Fish and Wildlife Service's Forensics Laboratory in Ashland, Ore., to rule out the possibility that she was killed in Wyoming and then dumped in Colorado.

Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, wolves north of I-70 in Colorado are classified as threatened. But the federal government says wolves have recovered enough to remove the threatened designation, which would give the state management authority in northern Colorado.

South of I-70, wolves are considered part of the southwest recovery area and remain federally protected as an endangered species.

In northern Colorado, people who see a wolf attack pets or livestock on private land may kill it. An illegal kill may bring a $100,000 fine, a year in jail and the loss of federal grazing or outfitting permits.

Bangs said it is not unusual for a young wolf to cover 490 miles, the distance from Mammoth Hot Springs.

Bangs and Smith, part of the team that tranquilized 293 and fitted her with a collar on Jan. 8, 2003, agreed that her journey does not mean Colorado will have a wild wolf population anytime soon.

"What it means is if people will let them come, they'll come," Smith said. "But they got to make it there and they've got to survive long enough to meet a member of the opposite sex."

"This is not the start of waves of wolves crashing into Colorado," Bangs said. "But that's not to say you won't have a litter in northern Colorado next year."

The last confirmed wolf killed in Colorado came from the Conejos Valley in 1935, records show.
 
This might be a stupid question, but how can you tell a wolf from a coyote? I know they are larger. But at two to three yards is there really a way to tell the two apart with the same color pelts. I can see how someone can tell the off color phase wolfs.
But at long distance do you just assume it might be a wolf and not shoot?

Thank God I live in California and don't have to worry about wolves. Just large cats running around here.

Bill
 
They are really significantly larger, enough that I think you'd be able to tell. Also my experience is if there are wolves in the area there aren't coyotes, they're a competitor so wolves kill them. I haven't seen a single coyote where I elk hunt since the wolves showed up.
 
Thanks for the info. Pretty amazing when you sit down and think about it. Its also pretty scary.
buck1.gif

Later, Brandon
 
i hadn't heard about that and I live in Idaho Springs! pretty wild how they get down here.
 
Does Colorado have any organized effort for their Sportsmen to comment on Colorado's wolf plan that is soon to be developed? I know of a few Sportsmen groups in Colorado but don't know if they have considered taking on this issue or if you are simply going to set back and allow all of the greenies in your state to determine what will happen to your wildlife resources.

If you don't get on this soon you will be way behind in the game.
 
A meeting was held Thursday June 10 in
Denver of reps from many different organizations
in regard to wolves in Colo. They are formulating
a plan right now.
 
Go kill them before they mess things up. Call it the three S's Shoot , shovel, and shut up.


mouse.gif
 
Rocketman,

Do you know which groups are/were representing Colorado's Sportsmen? I know that I have learned that some groups profess being Sportsmen oriented but in fact are Environmentalists masquerading as Sportsmen.

If anyone knows how the meeting on June 10 went I am interested to hear more about it.
 
Some of you guys crack me up with your narrow minded mentality. Why would you want to just go out and kill all of the wolves? What did they ever do to you? So they eat some deer, elk and other game animals. Remember, the purpose of hunting is to control animal populations not just the sport of killing. I really don't think the populations of the wolves have gotten out of hand in the lower 48 states. Now if you really wanted to have some sport, take on a wolf barehanded. I have and low and behold you won't be so almighty.
Arizona Griz.
 
Hopefully you all with wolves will be able to start shooting them when they get delisted. Instead of shootin coyotes in the winter we can shoot wolves or both. I'll bet most of the western slope folks will shoot wolves and ask questions later when the start showing up more over there, whether or not they are a "threatened" species. I'm no to worried though.
jeff
 
I am looking forward to the day when I hear wolves in Colorado. They belong here and I have no problem sharing the game with them. Just hope that I will be able to legally hunt them.
 
Maybe you guys don't understand what happens when your calf ratio drops from 30+ per hundred to the single digits. Places I used to see hundreds of elk don't look to great anymore.
 
Well, that won't happen if the wolves are managed they way they should be. Colorado already has too many elk in quite a few units anyway. This is simply mother nature at work. I don't believe the wolf issue is as simplistic as some people like to make it. If they are allowed to simply multiply unchecked then there certainly may be a problem. My hunch is that in Colorado this won't be allowed to happen. I don't think we have the habitat to support the number of wolves that are found in other states.

The simple fact is that I am willing to trade elk numbers for the chance to see, hear and hopefully hunt a wolf or two. We have too many elk in much of colorado anyway. Mother nature is doing her job. Besides? How are you going to stop wolves from crossing the border?

I am just weary of the whining about predators that is so prevalent around hunting circles today. Just pick up Hunting Illustrated for a good example. An otherwise great magazine but chock full of crap concerning the "danger" of bears and wolves to people and all kinds of other nonsense. The wolves are going to eat our children!! Predators have there place and if you are too selfish to lose some elk and deer to wolves then just admit it.

In my opinion the problem is not wolves, it is the way wolves are managed. The wolves are coming to Colorado whether I like it or not. I want to be able to hunt them and I hope there numbers are kept under control. I also hope that ranchers will be given plenty of leeway to protect their livestock as necessary. Time to start writing the Colorado G&F but not time to start putting poison out like some other morons are apparently doing, and not time to start getting hysterical.
 
Becareful what you ask for! Getting wolves will be far easier than controlling them. It is easy to say that we should welcome them back as they will provide additional hunting for us. However, look at what is taking place elsewhere. 1984 grizzly bears had met recovery goals and should have been delisted. 2004 grizzly bears are still protected. 1995 wolves introduced in the tri-state area (ID, MT, &WY). 2003 recovery goals met and surpassed. 2004 wolves remain protected with no clear solution to delisting. Meanwhile, moose and elk numbers are plummeting. Everyone is blaming this decline on the drought. How many extended periods of drought have occurred since we started recording precipitation?

Colorado Sportsmen should prepare to have wolves shoved down their throat or any other orifice you wouldn't prefer.

There is an agenda to eliminate hunting. Wolves are the tool whereby many hope to accomplish this feat. Rest assured all of you that many will betray you. Too many feel that returning large predators back to the ecosystem will bring balance to wildlife populations.

Two points;
1)Where were wildlife populations prior to settlement?
2)Can large predators help manage wildlife populations?

One only needs to look at journals of early explores to note the void that was here. There were vast herds of buffalo for sure but wildlife populations were far below current levels. Lewis & Clarke killed their mules at times because there wasn't anything for them to eat. Many areas were devoid of wildlife period.

Large predators (wolves in particular) do two things; they kill wildlife to survive and they reproduce. Don't believe for one instance that they kill only the week and the sick; they are opportunistic and kill whatever they can kill. In fact, many times they will kill more than they will eat. This is termed surplus killing. It has been documented and happens. Another point that many don't know is that the idea of one alpha male and one alpha female is not holding true when prey is abundant. In the tri-state area wolves have had numerous litters of pups from multiple bitches. This more than likely explains the rapid expansion of wolves were they remain protected. Our state wildlife managers can manage the number of hunters afield, they can not stop wolves from killing. If populations fall too low, wildlife management agencies can reduce licenses and a myriad of other tings which have proven to work for maintaining wildlife populations. On the other hand, tell me how they will communicate to wolves that they need to stop reducing (killing) wildlife populations so that there will be something left to hunt. Once they turn management of wildlife populations over to predators you can rest assured that hunting will decline if not totally be terminated. All you have to do is look at the number of licenses that are no longer available in Id, Mt, and Wy.

Wolves and grizzly bears still remain protected even though they have met and exceeded recovery goals!

It will not stop until they have taken away our ability to hunt. Once we can not hunt they will come after our guns.

Be careful what you ask for!
 
In addition to the above, which is right on, I love it (well not really) when some Enviro states they just want to reintroduce large predators to the ecosystem to return the "balance of nature". Cuz of man and his activities, that have so modified ecosytems there is no such thing. You can't take man out of the equation when manageing wildlife populations. As stated above the ultimate goal is to eliminate sport hunting. To be blunt, if you think wolf introduction/expansion is good you are stupid.

from the "Heartland of Wyoming"
 
Amen, SMOKESTICK. It sounds like a conspiracy beacause it is and in the end all hunters will pay. SSS

JB
 
Wolf reintroduction has been a terrible thing for the state of Montana and our game population. Wolf numbers are on the increase elk, deer and moose are on the decline. This past winter the Fish & Game killed 5 Wolves around Cameron MT,according to an article in one of our local newspapers,this was a pack no one knew existed.Imagine that? In my opionion what a perfect way of eliminating hunting. I believe the anti-hunters have had a lot to do with the reintroduction program.
 
>Some of you guys crack me
>up with your narrow minded
>mentality. Why would you want
>to just go out and
>kill all of the wolves?
>What did they ever do
>to you? So they eat
>some deer, elk and other
>game animals. Remember, the purpose
>of hunting is to control
>animal populations not just the
>sport of killing. I really
>don't think the populations of
>the wolves have gotten out
>of hand in the lower
>48 states. Now if you
>really wanted to have some
>sport, take on a wolf
>barehanded. I have and low
>and behold you won't be
>so almighty.
>Arizona Griz.

ArGriz
Have you seen the stats on Elk In the Jackson hole? Yellowstone area??? Almost 20,00 Elk in 1992 when the Wolves were introduced... now the hurd is at 9,000 ... there wont be any hunting if this keeps up with no controll on the Wolves!
 
I would like to know how many of you hunters out there voted to bring the wolves back into MT, ID, and WY. I lived in MT when they reintroduced them. There was never a vote that I remember. In fact, many of the newspapers around MT kept reporting "Amazing wolf sitings" in areas where there had been no wolves for many years. They put them there without asking the public. Yes, in the beginning (like now for you in CO), they were a fun and exciting thing, but so is heroin at first. I promise that the wolf reintoduction program was not created by or for sportsmen like us.
Someone else is out there calling the shots. If you read back through this thread, NO ONE has said that wolves in their backyard has improved the hunting. If you think that its a good idea and that maybe someday you will get a chance to hunt one, you are wrong. Like stated in prior posts, these people shoving the wolves down our throats are NOT trying to create more hunting opportunities for you.
There is a reason we killed them all one hundred years ago.
 
>ArGriz
>Have you seen the stats on
>Elk In the Jackson hole?
>Yellowstone area??? Almost 20,00 Elk
>in 1992 when the Wolves
>were introduced... now the hurd
>is at 9,000 ... there
>wont be any hunting if
>this keeps up with no
>controll on the Wolves!

There is a lot more to those numbers than wolves ate em all...

fires in 88 made for ripe conditions for the elk population to explode and now drought conditions for the last 4 years have made for dramatic lack of forage which means reduction of milk production and poor calf survival. Also grizzly bears are taking a pretty big share of the calfs as well.

But I do agree that the wolves are having an impact however. In some areas it's substancial. In other areas basically no impact. In some areas of MT with wolves... you could get a second elk tag!

But... the elk populations in WY have dropped dramatically in the last couple years, and as of now no one can really figure out why. Kind of like what happened to the muledeer 12 years or so ago... I think its just the cycle they all go through. I don't belive the end of elk hunting is here just yet... but it could be if we don't get some sort of control.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-22-04 AT 09:42PM (MST)[p]kilbuc,

Glad you have so much respect for others opinions. I repeat, who is going to stop the wolves at the border if they choose to come to Colorado? Been to Yellowstone lately? Nobody is shooting wolves in the park as far as I know, and guess what? There are so many elk they are pushing out the mule deer. Like I said the issue is not as simple as some would make it. By the way I am hardly an enviro having hunted in Alaska, with wolves, Saskatchewan, with wolves and saw quite a bit of game in spite of....wolves.

I said quite plainly that I want to be able to shoot wolves. That would of course involve wolf management by G&F. Sorry, but I don't believe that wolves coming into Colorado is going to mean the end of elk and deer hunting. Sorry if I don't just regurgitate the current party line.

Do anti-hunters want to end hunting? Yup. will they use wolves as leverage? Yup. Does that change the fact that wolves WILL be coming to Colorado wether through migration or secret plots? No.
Will advocating poisoning and poaching wolves help our cause? If you think yes then I have found my idiot...

When was your last letter to the G&F concerning this?
 
We, as hunters, regardless of your opinions didn't need the help of wolves to control the populations. Now we've got it and I don't like it.

JB
 
The battle over wolves in Colorado will be fought in the federal courts. Sure, state wildlife agencies can do their best to come up with acceptable wolf management porgrams, as they have been trying to do for many years in ID, MT and WY, but the fact is that if the environmentalists can convince a federal judge that state wolf management plans violate the endangered species act, there is NOTHING that the voters, state legislatures, or state wildlife agencies can do about it. We are at the mercy of the VERY liberal federal judiciary and the very well-funded environmentalist organizations that file lawsuits alleging violations of the endangered species act. So what I'm saying is that with the exception of a few federal judges, nobody in Colorado has any real power to decide how to manage wolves there, unless one of two things happens:
1) The U.S. Congress passes a desperately-needed revision of the Endangered Species Act (which was a good idea originally and doesn't need to be totally scrapped, but it really needs a good overhaul), or
2) We stop appointing leftist wackos to the federal bench.
Sadly, neither of these two things is likely to happen anytime soon. U.S Senators and Congressmen are too scared of the controversy that would be involved in making any serious alteration to the endangered species act, and every decent non-leftist nominated to the federal bench in recent years has had his nomination blocked by Senate democrats.
 
Gentlemem,

This argument comes down to one question... Will they de-list wolves? The answer is hell no. I have lived for years in Minnesota where we have more wolves than anyone needs and have had huntable populations for years and years with no de-listing. These populations exist in spite of the common practices of farmers shooting them. By the way, how much do you think a 150lb animal eats of only meat in a year? Wolves WILL reduce deer and elk populations. If they would de-list I would be for it, as is I am not. I hunt SW Colorado and that puts me in the "endangered" species area. Damn...

Shash
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom