10 ms·
I'm a resident of Estes Park, Colorado, what is essentially Rocky Mountain National Park, and my partner in life is a biologist in RMNP where she tracks and mon
by DavidPastrnak 3y ago
I'm a resident of Estes Park, Colorado, what is essentially Rocky Mountain National Park, and my partner in life is a biologist in RMNP where she tracks and monitors elk and moose populations. This has been on the forefront of our minds for awhile. While I’ll leave my personal opinion out of it, I do want to add a couple of notes.
Wolves have been crossing the boarder into Colorado for some time - the state is not completely void. Additionally, they have already released a handful in the last couple of weeks that were brought in from the PNW.
The topic of reintroduction is extremely complex and has led to heated and polarizing debates with residents across the state - even stretching into Wyoming politics where hunters are using electronic calls to lure them back across the border for hunting. This has resulted in a lot of confusion as to what the research outlines.
If anyone is curious, I have found this paper to be a great introduction to the topic. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.413 https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2...
Please remember that this is an extremely complex issue that is worth having constructive discussion on. I have faith that HN can keep it civil where other platforms have failed to.
- hanniabu 3y ago> even stretching into Wyoming politics where hunters are using electronic calls to lure them back across the border for hunting I think there's an argument to be made if the hunting method extends into the state where it's illegal (sounds waves traveling) then you're in violation of that state, since the lil would not have happened if the hunting method didn't traverse state lines.
- forgetfreeman 3y agoEnforcement is perfectly impossible. Source: lived in Wyoming.
- constantly 3y agoIt’s hard, not impossible. We need enforcement like we enforce endangered rhinos in Kenya from poachers.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hcfman 3y agoI have a sound localization project that can help with that https://github.com/hcfman/sbts-aru https://github.com/hcfman/sbts-aru You need to be able to hear the sound from three or more recorders. And normally localization is better within the polygon of microphones but there’s an area of better localizability extending outside of a vertex.
- COGlory 3y agoDo we really? Elk herds are fine. Seems like a waste of resources to have rhino-like enforcement for elk. Colorado has almost 300,000 elk.
- kej 3y agoI believe the previous poster meant that the wolves should have the rhino-like protections.
- forgetfreeman 3y agoSpend a significant amount of time in the state and get back to me about what's possible. I'll wait. Note you're talking about an area only slightly smaller than New Zealand with roughly identical population numbers to Santa Barbara County, 1 third of whom are either students at UWyo or migrating roughnecks with no dog in that fight. Ignoring the handful of millionaires clustered around Jackson Hole the rest of the population of the state are (taken in aggregate) heavily armed and utterly disinterested in the federal government's position on anything. You send a handful of well-intentioned game wardens from out of state into that mess and you're gonna have folks start disappearing.
- giantg2 3y agoI don't know how that would work or if there's any precedent for that. Generally states enter into agreements and different laws about enforcement. Or they sue each other in federal court (eg cannabis issues recently).
- lukas099 3y agoI guess a precedent would be noise pollution laws. You can create sound waves on your own property but be prosecuted for their effects outside of it
- giantg2 3y agoTo my knowledge that doesn't extend across state lines. I wanted to see precedent of someone doing something in one state and being criminally prosecuted for that act in a different state. As a counter example, it's extremely common for people to hunt (or fish) on the legal side of boundaries with a restricted area using calls (or scents, bait, chum) to lure game to the area they can legally be in.
- lukas099 3y agoAny case law for shooting a bullet across state lines and hitting someone?
- s1artibartfast 3y agoI assume you would still run into jurisdiction issues If it is legal to call in Wyoming, and the hunter is in Wyoming.
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y agoDisagree. I'm vegan and anti-hunting, but I don't think states should be able to enforce their laws outside of their states. That would lead to some real crazy stuff.
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoAny sort of cross border crime is regulated by the feds. Like if you steal a car and drive across the state border, it becomes a state offense. The feds could make cross border hunting illegal as well, but they would have to put in resources to enforce it.
- zoklet-enjoyer 3y agoRight. Colorado law should not be enforced in Wyoming. An animal call in Wyoming isn't hunting in Colorado.
- throwaway2037 3y ago> if you steal a car and drive across the state border, it becomes a state offense Tiny nitpick: Did you mean to say "it becomes a federal offense"?
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoYes.
- throwaway2037 3y agoI was also vegan for years, but not anti-hunting. While not a vegan today, my meat consumption is down by ~98% from childhood. Why are you anti-hunting? Usually, hunters are strong environmentalists. Plus, they are taking animals from their natural habit, instead of crowded feed lots.
- hombre_fatal 3y agoI haven’t found it to be the case that hunters are environmentalists except for some post hoc rationalization. It really just reduces to a hobby of killing animals at least with anyone I ever hunted with in my teens. And they were all right wing Texans, definitely not anyone who would sign on as an “environmentalist” except when in cases where they can glamorize their hobby.
- mmaunder 3y agoThanks for commenting David! I’m based in CO too and appreciate your insight.
- HaZeust 3y agoThe best state! In fact, I just went to Estes Park on Saturday for a tour of The Shining Hotel (Stanley Hotel) and our guide went on a bit of a background speech about these Colorado wolves, didn't expect it here - but glad to see a discussion!
- throwup238 3y ago> While I’ll leave my personal opinion out of it, I do want to add a couple of notes. What's your opinion, if you don't mind me asking? Personally I can't believe anyone is against this project. It's a complicated issue but the removal of wolves has had damn near catastrophic impact on pretty much everyone east of California from deer to ticks to elk. Even the ranchers are better off in the short run and especially long term. (I lose livestock every year to mountain lions so I'm no stranger to the cost of keeping apex predators around)
- syndicatedjelly 3y agoThe people against this have valid reasons. For example, ranchers who don't want their livestock eaten by wolves that they can't defend against, legally.
- DamnYuppie 3y ago[flagged]
- throwup238 3y agoLike I said I have to deal with the same issue thanks to mountain lions. I don't think it's a valid reason, it's a supremely selfish and shortsighted one.
- zdragnar 3y agoThe regulations on wolves are different. You can only get permission to use legal force on a case by case basis if they are attacking livestock (or if you catch them in the act). You can use force against a wolf attacking a working dog or yourself, but not a pet. In all other cases, you must use non-lethal detergent methods.
- throwup238 3y agoI live in California so the only minor difference is that you can use lethal force if a mountain lion is attacking a domestic animal but the CDFW will be on your ass and you better be sure it was the only option or you'll get prosecuted for poaching. (I just shoot a shotgun into the air which scares them off) Otherwise you need a depredation permit that are "must issue" if you have evidence of a mountain lion attacking your livestock but only one in ten applicants are granted a lethal depredation permit. The rest must use non-lethal deterrents because lethal force is only authorized if there's a genuine threat to public safety. For a rancher or someone living in a rural area, lethal permits are rarely issued. In several parts of the state like the Santa Monica and Santa Ana mountains permits are no longer issued at all.
- jjtheblunt 3y ago> even stretching into Wyoming politics where hunters are using electronic calls to lure them back across the border for hunting I wonder, in a Hannibal Lecter sort of way, what would be the essence of the mindsets of such hunters.
- amanaplanacanal 3y agoI’m not a hunter, but I can picture myself doing it. Hunting something I couldn’t eat does seem off though.
- COGlory 3y agoI've seen people go completely apeshit when elk hunting. It's just an awful selection cycle for people with low self esteem, rarity, FOMO, needing to prove something, and being far from consequences most of the time. Not all hunters are like this, but hunting naturally selects for people that are the most like that because it's the only blood sport left, really. And elk are the biggest thing. It's not unheard to pay $30,000+ for a "sure thing" bull elk hunt.
- chasd00 3y agoTrophy hunters are like stamp or coin collectors. They search and search for the rarest animal (record setting whitetail deer being the most common) to kill and hang in their wall. People don’t like it but that’s about what it is, rare collectibles.
- tw04 3y agoIt only seems complicated in-so-far as ranchers who are making millions off running cattle at least partially on public lands are concerned they may take a 5% hit in their profits to the occasional cattle lost to wolves (which could be prevented by actually having staff following them vs just letting them roam). Other than “but I want to make even more money” I haven’t heard a lot of arguments against.
- idiotsecant 3y agoThis is wildly over-simplifying the issue. Obviously you'd not be ok with me releasing wolves into your back yard, the difference here is only one of population density. The issue has subtleties and soundbite reductiveness does nobody any favors.
- tw04 3y agoI’d be perfectly fine with it, I would scare them off and that would be it. These aren’t grizzly bears. Wolves aren’t hunting humans unless they have literally no other options. I have no doubt they’d happily feast on deer vs finding out if the warning shot was a bluff. We have wolves in my state. I’ve never once been concerned about my safety when it comes to wolves.
- pookha 3y agoPlenty of ranches (privately owned) use livestock waste for farming and to improve the soil. You're arguing that we should allow wolves -- that the government introduces -- to wipe out the main component of their ranch (livestock). In my eyes that's an insane proposition and it directly benefits the big industrial operations that frequently compete with these newer styled ranches. In the end you'd have more run-off and more pollution and a lot more carbon because the soil would be shot (thanks to monocrop farming).
- tw04 3y ago> to wipe out the main component of their ranch (livestock). Wipe out??? Do you think they’re introducing 40k wolves or do you just have no idea how wolves work? There is literally 0 chance the livestock is wiped out, even without any management by the government. And there will absolutely be management of the population.
- rufus_foreman 3y agoDo you have any opinion on the recent reintroduction of coyotes from Arizona into the area?
- jbotz 3y ago> remember that this is an extremely complex issue Hmph. No possyfooting. Apex predators are essential for properly functioning ecosystems. We know this know, there isn't any doubt. Want an ecosystem that isn't on the verge of collapse? Introduce some appropriate apex predators. There is no argument. Is the issue complex? Yes, because humans don't like competition in their status as apex predators, and god forbid, a human could be hurt by a wolf, or a famer could lose a few heads of lifestock. Remember, 97% of terrestrial vertebrate biomass is humans and their livestock. If don't do what's needed to maintain that last 3%, well, then humans and our livestock will soon be 100% of terrestrial vertrbrate biomass.
- peteradio 3y agoYa but what if the wolves eat that last 3%?
- pvaldes 3y agoIs a legit concern, but biodiversity does not work like that. To start, predators block the spreading of diseases that would kill its preys. Wolves will also reduce the amount of common preys, creating opportunities for the less common preys, will reduce the number of small predators and probably exile them to the frontiers of its territory, will boost tree grow, and will create new temporary ecosystems based on carcasses. This last can seem gross, but it sustain thousands of invertebrates and help raptors and small vertebrates to survive winter
- naravara 3y agoThe comment you're addressing seems like an ecosystem equivalent to what economists call the "lump of labor fallacy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy "Lump of biomass" fallacy might be a name for it. As for the carrion bit, apparently when they returned wolves to Yellowstone, it wasn't just the invertebrates and raptors. Even the bears started putting on weight because the wolves were surplus hunters and would leave a lot of meat lying around for the bears to scavenge before winter.
- rsync 3y ago"While I’ll leave my personal opinion out of it, I do want to add a couple of notes." Do you believe that humans and (packs of) wolves can coexist in the same space ? I am genuinely curious to hear what you think of an area inhabited by packs of wolves - would you engage in hiking/camping/recreation in that area after dark ? I am in favor of wolf reintroduction, in general, and think it is a noble goal. However, I believe that my support of wolf reintroduction is creating zones of non-habitation for humans. This is because my reading of the history of wolf/human interactions - throughout European and North American history - supports this very traditional view. What worries me is that many people may not understand that their support of wolf reintroduction creates an exclusion zone for humans. Certainly after dark. It is possible that not everyone would accept that trade-off the way that I have.
- DavidPastrnak 3y ago> I am genuinely curious to hear what you think of an area inhabited by packs of wolves - would you engage in hiking/camping/recreation in that area after dark ? My personal answer to this is yes - I have hiked / backcountry skied on multi-day tours in areas with active wolf populations. I also currently live in a small mountain town with an active mountain lion population that regularly makes its way through our roads and yards. I am more concerned with people, moose, and avalanches than I am either of those two. Of course, not everyone is going to have those same views.
- captainclam 3y agoSame here. The notion of wolves as a safety issue has literally not occurred to me until this person asked. I'm very alert to grizzly, moose, and mountain lions. Is there evidence that I should add wolves to that list?
- runsWphotons 3y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wolf_attacks https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wolf_attacks
- TheCondor 3y agoThe moose was reintroduced and it has brought havoc to the beaver habitat, especially in rocky. We need wolves or something to balance the moose. It has become a very different park since the moose has invaded
- DavidPastrnak 3y agoYes! However, there is some good news I'd like to add - they made some progress on the beaver habitat over the last few years here in Rocky. Still so so far to go but a small win to celebrate.
- piaste 3y agoHow did the moose damage the beaver habitat? Do they forage the same plants and outcompete the beavers at them?
- DavidPastrnak 3y agoThat is a big piece of the puzzle - overgrazing of willows. https://www.rockymountainnationalpark.com/gallery/moose/#:~:text=It%20is%20thought%20that%20their,the%20struggling%20population%20of%20beaver https://www.rockymountainnationalpark.com/gallery/moose/#:~:.... https://www.nps.gov/articles/beaver-occupancy-in-rocky-mountain-national-park.htm https://www.nps.gov/articles/beaver-occupancy-in-rocky-mount...
- lp251 3y agooff topic, but how is living in Estes Park?
- perrygeo 3y agoThanks David. I'm just a few miles downhill (Masonville) and I agree that it's a complex issue. The intentional introduction of any species raises many ethical questions. Humans have completely altered the ecosystem by removing wolves over the last 100 years. We understand this now, and the "reintroduce wolves to restore the ecosystem" reaction is a very reasonable public response. But it's only a start, let's not get distracted by charismatic megafauna. We cannot pin ecosystem health on the presence/absence of a single species. This is not ecosystem restoration, it's a political accounting trick to manage species counts ... and pretend that's a proxy for a balanced ecosystem (without understanding habitat fragmentation and loss, energy and nutrient cycling, climate change pressures, etc). So the challenge is, can we sustain an ecosystem to support new wolves and ourselves? To those of us who want to produce the land for economic gain - I applaud you, homo economicus. But when our market demands every last watt of productivity be directed to human markets, there's not much room to allow wolves to roam amongst livestock. If you're competing in the modern financialized agriculture markets, you're already under debt pressure and committed to a full-scale unconditional war against every non-human species - reintroduction of wolves is a direct attack. I'm not for or against wolf re-introduction. I'm for ecosystem restoration and a sane economy. I'm for humans taking care of the land, meeting our needs AND carving out areas where wolves and other large mammals are allowed to "make a living". And that goes much deeper than just busing a few wolves into Colorado.
- pharmakom 3y ago> hunters are using electronic calls to lure them back across the border for hunting What does this mean?
- naravara 3y agoIt's legal to hunt them in Wyoming but not in Colorado. The wolves don't know this, so the hunters are able to lure them across the border so they can shoot them.