Lonely lady wolf looks for love in all the wrong places
By Berny Morson, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published February 25, 2009 at 3:09 p.m.
Call it the power of love.
A female wolf has wandered more than 1,000 miles through five states in search of a mate and is now in Colorado's Eagle County, wildlife officials in Colorado and Montana said Wednesday.
The wolf, known only as 314F, set off on her lonely quest in September when, for reasons unknown, she became unhappy with the male prospects among the pack of seven animals she was born into 20 months earlier.
Since then, 314F has followed her heart from the Paradise Valley north of Yellowstone National Park through Wyoming, Utah and Idaho. She has trotted past areas where other wolf packs are known to live toward a state that has not had a wolf population for 60 years.
Montana officials follow her progress with a global positioning device on a collar that was fitted to her neck in July.
"Basically, what she's doing is, she's wandering around looking to see if there's other wolves around," said Carolyn Sime, wolf program coordinator for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
Her prospects here are not good. The last confirmed wolf sighting in Colorado was a male who made his way from Yellowstone in 2004. But he was killed on Interstate 70 near Idaho Springs before anyone knew he was here.
Colorado Division of Wildlife biologist Shane Briggs said that when wolf packs get too large, some animals leave in search of a mate with whom to start a new pack in a different area, Briggs said. That's how the species increases its range, he said.
Before the 2004 sighting, wolves were considered extinct in Colorado. The last confirmed one had been killed in 1943.
Wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone National Park in 1995.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
February 25, 2009
3:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
"harassed without federal approval"
So where do you apply for your harrassment permit?
February 25, 2009
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
And the animal nuts claim that reintroducing wolves to Rocky Mountain National Park will not be an issue because they think the wolves will stay within the park boundaries.
Once again... reality proves the nuts wrong... as usual.
February 25, 2009
3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
gkb2008 writes:
Hopefully many more of them will make Colorado their home and chow down on many present and future Republicans...
February 25, 2009
3:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
RockHawper writes:
Wolves in the Colorado rockies. Should be no problem. Its not like our mountains are very populated.
Oh wait.
February 25, 2009
4:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
Oh I hope she is able to hunt and do ok without a pack. She must be managing so far. I really want wolves back in Colorado!
February 25, 2009
4:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Squatch writes:
Wolves are coming & Grizzleys in SW Colorado something the DOW doesnt talk about but the locals do.
February 25, 2009
4:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Another imported Canadian wolf ?
Twice the size of American wolves.
Convenient that these two female wolves were found next to an Interstate -70 exit.
Did they catch a ride from Montana?
.
February 25, 2009
4:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Awal writes:
"Wolves are coming & Grizzleys in SW Colorado something the DOW doesnt talk about but the locals do."
I have it from a semi-reliable DOW source that there have continually been small (but reproducing) numbers of grizzlies in north central Colorado and southern Wyoming, but they always have kept it on the extreme down-low.
February 25, 2009
4:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Are problem bears from Yellowstone also dumped in other states ?
February 25, 2009
5:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
rickg19611 writes: "And the animal nuts claim that reintroducing wolves to Rocky Mountain National Park will not be an issue because they think the wolves will stay within the park boundaries. Once again... reality proves the nuts wrong... as usual."
We're talking one wolf that's traveled out of her park, rickg. You make it sound like packs of them are en route!
This is almost a miraculous example of nature working against all odds to re-establish a presence in a former habitat. Even if you oppose reintroducing wolves to certain areas of Colorado, don't you view this wolf's thousand mile journey with at least some modicum of awe? Sometimes I wonder if you even like animals at all, you always write such negative posts on the animal interest stories.
February 25, 2009
5:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
johnson writes:
Sounds like the coyotes are calling in back-up.
February 25, 2009
6:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
BenchBoss writes:
johnson wrote:
"Sounds like the coyotes are calling in back-up."
You read my mind, johnson. Just think of all the B-movie possibilities. Wolves runnin' with coyotes through Denver. Some of the bison at Rocky Mtn. Arsenal could become crazed by all the chemicals, break free, wreak havoc. I think we have a 'go' picture.
February 25, 2009
6:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
MattGuyver_007 writes:
Yes Temurlan, I too am interested in making application for a harassment permit. I'm sure the DOW office in Boulder can grant me one.
February 25, 2009
6:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
And to think that some PEOPLE never even their own county during their entire lives.
February 25, 2009
6:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Coloheart writes:
Wolves will eat the coyotes ...... Bring it on, better than TV
February 25, 2009
7:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
A pack of wolves killed a woman in the Kakheti region of eastern Georgia in the third attack in a month
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pi...
February 25, 2009
7:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Illegallydead writes:
I would not doubt this in the least. I am pretty sure I saw a pair of wolves near Mt. Evans in the wilderness area near Grey Wolf Mountain (ironic...) 2 years ago. I know what a coyote looks like, and these weren't coyotes... they were wolves and they were going for a herd of elk. I am personally glad this one has made its way here, as it might signal wolves being reintroduced eventually.
And to those people worrying about wolves being in populated mountain areas: remember, YOU are in THEIR habitat. THEY are NOT in YOURS.
February 25, 2009
7:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Coloheart writes:
Come on FCZ, There's a lot less out there to eat than in the wilds of Colorado.
Your tax dollars wouldn't be paying for culling right now, if there was a maintained pack in RMNP.
February 25, 2009
7:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Licensed hunters would pay to hunt elk in RMNP.
The government could make money while regulating the process.
Families would get some food on their table.
February 25, 2009
8:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
PaleoConservative writes:
Illegallydead writes:
"I would not doubt this in the least. I am pretty sure I saw a pair of wolves near Mt. Evans in the wilderness area near Grey Wolf Mountain (ironic...) 2 years"
I heard one howling on Gray Wolf Mtn., and found tracks in the snow on Mt. Spalding. They're here.
February 25, 2009
8:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
goopey writes:
temurlan, I have read this article over three times and can't find the quote you reference. The real quote that cuts the cake for me is, "Such an attack is unlikely because wolves stay away from areas associated with humans," Sime said. She was referring to the idea of a wolf attacking livestock.
I grew up 50 miles north of Yellowstone National Park and these attacks are VERY likely by a pack (most likely not by a lone female). I can't even count anymore how many times wolves took down livestock. I'm surprised that she said that knowing very well the huge debate in Montana whether the wolves should of been introduced or not, the latter of which is argued mostly by Montana ranchers who have lost livestock.
February 25, 2009
9:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
falcon65 writes:
The wolf, known only as "314F," set off on her lonely quest in September when, for reasons unknown, she became unhappy with the male prospects among the pack of seven animals she was born into 20 months earlier.
She traveled all the way to Colorado from Calif for "reasons unknown" duh - she must have been frustrated by all the same-sex situations in Calif? Not that it much better in Colorado - suggest that she does not go to Boulder County
February 25, 2009
10:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
westforkforge writes:
To: gkb2008
I'd rather they acquire a taste for ACORNS and rid the country of nuts!
February 25, 2009
10:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
windskull writes:
back in 1991 at dotsero, sweet water lake to be exact a white wolf came into camp 3 times one of the guys dogs went into heat, unfortunately none of the pictures turned out and heavy rain washed away the tracks before we could get "official" verification
February 25, 2009
10:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
TallGirl writes:
illegallydead writes:
"And to those people worrying about wolves being in populated mountain areas: remember, YOU are in THEIR habitat. THEY are NOT in YOURS."
Exactly!!!! Thank you! People need to learn how to co-exist with animals instead of "eliminating the problem" (i.e., lets shoot all the coyotes in Greenwood Village instead of teaching people not to try to feed and pet the cute "wild doggies"). It's called an ecosystem, people. If we just kill and wipe out everything, it upsets a balance. This world is overpopulated with humans. Solution? Limit human breeding? No, let's let the Nadya Suleman's of the world keep doing what they are doing and let's kill all the wildlife getting in the way of our ever-expanding development as we attempt to find room for all these "humans." A bit off topic, yes, but still..... Getting back to the original point: Bring back the wolves to Colorado, now!!!
February 25, 2009
10:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
'It's a completely different predator'
Her voice tinged with emotion and the video camera jiggling in her shaking hand, Tonya Martin filmed and narrated the scene she found behind her ranch home March 5 -- five sheep had been killed by a wolf and another five were wounded, three of them fatally.
"In the end, it's hard to watch what your animals go through," said Martin, 36, while showing the location of the slaughter last week. "It makes me question what the future will be with the wolf packs."
Martin was driving a tractor out to feed her cow-calf pairs around 8:30 a.m. March 5 when her mother-in-law sighted the big black wolf...
At the time, Martin didn't know the wolf had killed five of her sheep.
A veterinarian was called to patch up the five injured sheep, most of them with torn throats, but only two of those survived.
"I've never seen anything like it," Martin said. "Some were hamstrung, their legs were broken and twisted. I'd never seen kills like it before. The sheep were scared to death."
"It was a sad day, because I know he'll be back, and he'll be back with friends."
TWO DOT, Montana --
by Brett French, Billings Gazette, Mar 18, 2008
February 25, 2009
10:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
RMN123 writes:
I agree. Bring the wolves back to Colorado. They belong here.
It's amazing how dumb you redneck elephants are. Luckily with all of your inbreeding, your species will be extinct soon.
You're the same people (I use that term loosely) that still believe global warming is not real and "drill, drill, drill" is the answer to the US's problems. Get your pea brains into the 21st century already. You're time is up.
February 25, 2009
11 p.m.
Suggest removal
jax writes:
TallGirl: You get 'em girl! I completely agree! Honestly, I'd rather see the humans go than the animals. Humans and their lack of common sense, as it is today, are the issue, not the animals. So, peace off people!!! Bring back the wolf and all their wolfy friends :)
February 25, 2009
11:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Illegallydead writes:
falcon65 writes:
[...]
She traveled all the way to Colorado from Calif for "reasons unknown" duh - she must have been frustrated by all the same-sex situations in Calif? Not that it much better in Colorado - suggest that she does not go to Boulder County
Dude, read the article before you go on whatever minority-bashing rant you want to go on. She wandere from YELLOWSTONE. That would be in Montana and Wyoming, genius. That's in, oh, line 4 of the article, just in case you forgot your geography...
While I respect your right to have an opinion about the [completely unrelated] issue of gay marriage, please, keep it out of a story about Wolves... Especially after you have already proved you aren't exactly the brightest bulb on the bush...
February 25, 2009
11:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
vYRaL303 writes:
Learn to coexist people
February 25, 2009
11:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
lotuspetal writes:
Poor little lady wolf. Why didn't one of her wolfie friends tell her the prospects in Colorado aren't good! Especially when she's the only wolf in town!
By the way, reintroducing wolves in Colorado might take care of the overpopulation of elk and deer...send an elk to Montana and a wolf to Colorado...great exchange program!
February 26, 2009
7:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
INC writes:
Another reason for republicans to remain paranoid and stay in their bunkers. surely their poodle fifi will become an afternoon snack.
February 26, 2009
7:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Keep the wolves in Yellowstone. They do not need to be "everywhere" to sustain a balance in nature. There was a reason that wolves were eliminated. Maybe you "foaming at the mouth do'gooders" should read some history?
February 26, 2009
9:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
johnson writes:
I love all the comments about how "people are in their environment" and "wolves were here first". Easy to say when you're living in a nice suburban home or downtown loft apartment. Try making a living off the land and say that. We need farmers and ranchers. All that stuff at Safeway comes from somewhere, ya know?
February 26, 2009
9:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Next : Bring back polio and the plague.
They were here first.
February 26, 2009
9:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
Actually, illegallydead, Tallgirl, et al, it is our territory as well as theirs. We, too, are a product of Nature (what WAS she thinking?!), and I doubt if we are planning to stop breeding any time soon- or at least practicing. Of course, if Yellowstone blows up, this will all become moot, but until then, we will have to live side-by-side with the other animals. This does not mean that I'm going to hide in my cave for fear of them, only that we and they will have to learn respect for one another. We certainly did it up in Alaska, even on the Air Force bases. I won't hunt them, if they do not hunt me and mine. If they do, I will react like any other predator whose territory is threatened. Woof. Growl.
February 26, 2009
9:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
FCZ Writes :
Next : Bring back polio and the plague.
They were here first.
That is the dumbest statement I have read in awhile!
Get a clue!
February 26, 2009
10:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
RockHawper writes:
This is Colorado. Not Canada, Alaska, or Wyoming (all places with an abundance of wilderness areas). Wolves were not here when people purchased their homes in the mountains. Many, many, many people. There would be daily clashes.
Mountain lions - check
Bears - check
Elk - check
Pack hunting predators? No
The artificial re-introduction of a pack predator, to an ecosystem which has already balanced without it, is not just stupid...its criminal.
These are not cute little doggies folks. "Lonely lady wolf" what a retarded headline.
February 26, 2009
10:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
GILPINMAN writes:
A harasment permit is also called a conservation license available at any location you can buy a fishing license. Basicly it is a hunting license but you can't kill anything. Technicaly you need one to take pictures of wild life, like at RMNP. Most states require them.
February 26, 2009
10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
RockHawper - you sound like a transplant from another State.
February 26, 2009
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
I am so excited that the wolf is here in Colorado, but cautiously optimistic as there are those who will go out of their way to hurt animals they don't "like."
Regarding Greenwood Village's "War on Coyotes," people should walk the parks at dawn and dusk so the hired sharpshooter can't shoot!
February 26, 2009
10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
RockHawper, I'm just curious how you think that the elk are "already balanced without it" cause if they were we wouldn't have sharp shooters out there right this minute trying to cull some of them.
February 26, 2009
10:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
Who_Me writes:
The effort expended by this lonely lady wolf is nothing compared to the effort I've seen expended by cougars. I mean, the amount of time a cougar spends on working out, makeup, hair, nails, reading and replying to postings on various dating Web sites, prowling for hook-ups, you name it, is just plain amazing.
February 26, 2009
10:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
Wolves should have never been "exterminated" in the first place. They have an absolute right to be here, and we need them here to keep prey populations (such as elk) healthy and in balance.
Beyond that, I believe the American public is owed reparations for the massive and (almost) irreparable damage that Wildlife Services has done by exterminating wolves and other native predatory animals by barbaric and cruel methods (traps, poisons, aerial hunting, and more).
By their actions, this agency has effectively denied Americans the right to enjoy our native wildlife as was given by nature (and God depending on your viewpoint).
http://www.wildearthguardians.org/lib...
February 26, 2009
10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
RockHawper writes:
I respect the wolves. They just don't belong in an overly populated area. i.e- All of Colorado.
H20 - You sound like you wave hi to your prairie dog friends as you ride your bike to work in Boulder.
Jluv - The sharp shooters are the balance. Not a perfect solution, but what else is better? Artificially introduced wolves are not the natural balance you have a 'gut' feeling they would be.
February 26, 2009
10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
zapman writes:
Gilpinman- you are incorrect about the "conservation license". It is called a Habitat Stamp and is only required on State Wildlife Areas (state owned properties) not a federal property like RMNP.
Most of them are purchased by sportspersons (hunters & anglers) who already pay all the costs of wildlife management. If you don't buy a hunting or fishing license or a Habitat Stamp you are a freeloader when it comes to paying the bills for wildlife.
So, all you tree huggers, hikers, photographers, etc. pony up and help pay your fair share. You sure like to spout off on topics about wildlife (mostly ignorant statements) but I sure don't see many of you stepping up to the plate and putting your money where your mouths are.
February 26, 2009
10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
frosty writes:
FCZ, you must be an ignorant fool from some big east coast city, no knowledge of living with nature, just kill everything your scared of. Why don't you move to NYC, you won't have to worry about nature. But your idiotic comments sound like your a ten year old who's afraid of your own shadow.
February 26, 2009
10:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
RockHawper that's some funny sh**. Thanks for the laugh!!!
February 26, 2009
11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Barb
Are you for real? Since when does an animal have an "absoulte right to be here"? That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Lots of animals and species have become extinct over time. Wolves would not be an asset to this state. Leave them in Canada, Alaska,Yellowstone, and your backyard.
February 26, 2009
11:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
Goopey,
The part of the article I was referring to has been removed. It said something like "wolves can't be killed or harassed without DOW approval." I thought that sounded odd.
Gilpinman,
I was making a joke about the "harassment permit". Guess the jokes on me.
February 26, 2009
11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Elk and the wolf are much more a "plains" animal than the mountains you refer to. So in reality, it is the people of Denver and the FrontRange that are the problem rather than those living in Breck and other mountain communities..............
I truly do not have a problem with introducing wolves into Colorado. They are fascinating animals. More migration will result with elk and other habitat. This strengthens the gene pool. That migration will be even more here in the "burbs" than what is already here. Usually 15-20 bulls skirting Highlands Ranch every winter......... Add the cows that migrate out of Rampart range into the "plains" each winter and guess what will follow? Yes the wolves.......... We will drastically cut down on feral pets. As the elk migrate we will not hear of coyote attacks in Open Space areas in the burbs, but actual wolf attacks......... Will be great press. Much like the local papers around Yellowstone Park each summer as stupid people try to mingle and get "close" to wildlife. Was always good for coffee room laughs..........
February 26, 2009
11:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
These are imported Canadian wolves.
Look it up.
Easy to do.
February 26, 2009
11:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
jersey writes:
Wow! Over a thousand miles through 5 states? If ever there was a valid "I have a headache" on a Saturday night she's legit!
February 26, 2009
11:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
PaleoConservative writes:
INC writes:
"Another reason for republicans to remain paranoid and stay in their bunkers. surely their poodle fifi will become an afternoon snack."
Republicans don't own poodles or eat quiche.
February 26, 2009
11:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
IslandExile writes:
FCZ,
So What?
They are Rocky Mountain wolves! They are the closest population of Rocky Mountain wolves with which to re-populate the US Rockies. They are about the same size as the Wisconsin population according to on-line data.
Wolves are larger the farther North you go, all over the planet. The Red wolf and Mexican wolf are smaller because they are farther South.
The Eastern European (Georgia) wolves show strikingly different behavior around people, perhaps since they have been interacting for hundreds of years longer.
Easy to look up! Even easier to wonder why you try to stir the pot?
February 26, 2009
11:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
Elkman, you are very confused.
You said "lots of animals have become extinct over time."
Wolves did not naturally 'become extinct.'
They are still considered endangered in most states except Alaska.
They (along with mountain lions and coyotes) were very purposefully harrassed, threatened, and killed by Wildlife Services over many decades on behalf of the livestock industry.
Animals that are threatened or endangered have a legal right under the ESA to be protected and/or reintroduced.
February 26, 2009
12:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Like that Aspen woman who swam across the Atlantic Ocean in 25 days.
" more than 1,000 miles through five states "
sure.
February 26, 2009
12:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Barb
My statement is true. Lots of animals have become extinct through time. Some naturally, some not. I never made a distinction. Who says the wolf would never have become "naturally" extinct? Odds are not, but then dinosuars became extinct. My point is that they do not need to be introduced every where again. Keep them in certain areas, like Yellowstone. Let them into areas like Colorado, and they may not surrvive. Ranchers will not tolerate having wolves feast on their livestock. And the wolves will eat cattle, sheep, and any other domestic livestock. You or anyone else can stop that. So, be realistic and stop letting your emotions drive your brain.
February 26, 2009
1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
Actually, again, Elkman, your facts are confused.
Predation on livestock from predatory animals is less than 2%. The rest is mainly from diseases, birthing problems, weather, and others issues.
Ranching in the arid west is an oxymoron and a dying business, too, Elkman. It's no longer economically feasible for most ranchers as the property is becoming too valuable whereas developers want it for condos, etc. and the public wants it for recreation.
February 26, 2009
1:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Exxon writes:
Elkman and all you other oldfashioned uneducated ranchers. First off if you dont want a problem with wolves try raising Bison as your livestock!!!!
They have naturally evolved to fend off predators from their young. Also they would survive those harsh winter storms like the ones we had a few years back where all the ranchers were whining about their cattle loss. Bison is a healthier meat, you can just let them live in their natural habitat, and they are by far less destructive on an enviornment that coevolved biodiversity along side the bison.
The fact is is that meat is extremely expensive to produce, particularly cattle. It has devestated our natural habitat, made our nation fatter, and still requires subsidys to ranchers who do nothing but whine instead of forging newer economically feasible paths on their own.
Reintroduce the wolf, Its introduction in yellowstone has proved to have far flinging previously unthough of ramifications on the parks enviornment. For instance trees and grass grow longer and forests start easier when their arent tons of elk eating every sapling as soon as it sprouts.
The wolf is a Keystone species of the western enviornment and as such should be reintroduced. Im not really worried about that though cause nature will just spread the wolfs range for me. As long as the dumb ranchers dont pay a ton of high priced lobbyists to legalize the extermination of the wolves again.
February 26, 2009
1:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
"Lonely lady wolf looks for love in all the wrong places"
Maybe she should try Live Linx?
February 26, 2009
1:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Barb
"Predation on livestock from predatory animals is less than 2%. The rest is mainly from diseases, birthing problems, weather, and others issues".
Where is the data to prove that? With wolves not being present in Colorado, how can you possibly use data that does not include wolves? Seems to me that the big game in this state is doing pretty well without having wolves. If big game needs thinning, CDW lets out more tags to thin the herds. We are already balanced and do not need to bring in wolves.
February 26, 2009
1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
"If big game needs thinning, CDW lets out more tags to thin the herds. We are already balanced and do not need to bring in wolves." Ahh I see Elkman is worried about the competition! LOL
February 26, 2009
2:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
H20
Is common sense something you lack? Why is is that most of you people who know very little about wildlife have no common sense? Oh yea, because you think with emotion and no brain.
February 26, 2009
2:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
I think he was making a lighthearted joke elkman...
February 26, 2009
2:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
Why are you so defensive? Did I strike a senstive cord with you? Your comments are very transparent.
Elkman do society a favor and pick up a book and read! Maybe start by reading your comments and see the lack of common sense you have.
February 26, 2009
2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Do you hunt? Thought not.
February 26, 2009
2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
Sure do!
February 26, 2009
2:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
If so, what value do you see in wolves being in Colorado? Would you also like to see the Grizzly brought here too? Why do you think that man sought to erradicate the wolf? The problem with the re-introduction of wolves is that they will seek the easiest prey, and will not stay where man puts them. People who live in the mountains have dogs, goats, horses, cows, sheep, chickens, etc. Do you honestly think that a wolf would hunt deer and elk when it is much easier to kill a goat, horse, or cow in someone's fenced in property?
February 26, 2009
2:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
I was making a joke! Everything has a place in this world. Modern day hunting that is regulated by DOW is a way to balance the Ecosystem. Not the best way, but a way to thin out the population. The Natural way is always the best approach, let Mother nature do the work. Basic science 101.. Don't get me wrong I enjoy hunting but you have to look at it from both sides of the coin.
February 26, 2009
2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
GILPINMAN writes:
The reality of it is that we already HAVE GRIZZLIES AND WOLVES! Several grizzlies are in southern Colorado and north park that are known of and I personally have encountered wolves on the upper williams fork. I watched the wolves take down an elk 2 years ago, what a rush! I say leave them alone and repopulate as they please. I would rather hear wolves at night than those pesky coyotes.
SAD TO HEAR ABOUT RMN;(
February 26, 2009
2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
I am in favor of the Grizzly brought back. I read some articles about possible sitings as recent as 2006 in the San Isabel NF.
Unfortunately I think that is the risk one has to take if they choose to live in the mountains..
February 26, 2009
2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
Man thought to erradicate them out of fear, lack knowledge and competition.
February 26, 2009
2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
RedneckBronco writes:
Bring the wolves to Greenwood Village. They'll reduce the coyote population.
February 26, 2009
2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
Classified ad: SFGW (Single Female Gray Wolf) seeking SMGW. Object: fun and breeding. Must love howling at the moon, running (and going) in the forest, eating rabbits, and cross-country marathons. Dog breath a must. Coyotes need not apply.
February 26, 2009
2:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
RockHawper writes:
Ahhh why not...since these comments are coming down tomorrow anyways.
Here's how the actual classified add would read:
Bloodthirsty rabid predator seeks to skullf@#$ your dog, rip its throat out, and swallow your cat for a snack. Please welcome me with open arms. Its only fair because we were here first...or something.
February 26, 2009
2:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
DragonInTheSky writes:
rickg & FCZ..You are such clueless idiots there is no need for a response to your ridiculous drivel.
TallGirl, you are spot on! It is shocking to see that the ignorance about these beautiful and amazing creatures is still alive and well. What a shame. I find some comfort in knowing that it will all come back around. Humans are the most destructive and selfish beings that have ever existed. Although we act like it, we are not the only animals that deserve to live on this planet. It's called sharing, and it is something that needs to be done in order to maintain our own survival.
February 26, 2009
2:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
vendari...LOL! You are cracking me up today!
February 26, 2009
2:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
Just keep the wolfs away from my sheep!
February 26, 2009
2:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
DragonInTheSky writes:
RockHawper..You are a classic example of the ignorance I was just speaking of. Thanks for sharing your stupidity.
February 26, 2009
3 p.m.
Suggest removal
DragonInTheSky writes:
vendari01.. That was adorable!! :o)
February 26, 2009
3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
RockHawper writes:
Thanks for sharing Dragon. Crank up the New Age tunes and dust off the dreamcatcher feathers. Lets hold hands, form a circle, and sing kumbaya as we dance to the rythym of the wolf !
Did you forget the 'PASS' part of puff, puff?
February 26, 2009
3:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
I love wildlife in general, I hope they do repopulate in Colorado! RockWawper, it sounded like you were describing humans in you post:)
February 26, 2009
3:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Dragon
First I am for reintroduction. I have volunteered in Wolf rescue and habitat related endeavors.
But are you willing to accept those wolves that will displace the coyotes that are now an assumed problem in the frontrange? They are leaving Yellowstone for a reason. They are migrating through the Madison, Yellowstone and Gallatin watershed North and also moving obviously south. I dont have a problem with it personally, but it is bringing new challenges to less populated areas. Add that challenge to the Frontrange. This is why there are groups out there that have said a reintroduction into RMNP is NOT a good idea......
February 26, 2009
3:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
Yes, but how do we thin out the humans?
February 26, 2009
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Barb
2% of livestock being killed?
What percentage of viable ranch land is inhabited by predators? Does this not affect your % figure given?
Lies
Damn Lies
and then there are Statistics
I guess you have not witnessed what a pack of 4-8 coyotes can do to a sheep herd.... It is amazingly brutal, efficient and yes wasteful. Imagine calving season with cattle ranches and wolves, not coyotes....... I too have witnessed what both wolves and coyotes have done during this time of the season in the Madison river drainage system for cattle and sheep.
February 26, 2009
3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Hank,
With all of the chaos going on right now........... The Chaos theory may well solve that question for you :-)
Man has mainly avoided the 10 cycle that most of the rest of the food chain lives and dies by.......... This can only be avoided for awhile. Eventually Mother Nature will catch up and even the odds a bit
February 26, 2009
3:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
CoLIB...too true! It seems like the earth tries to cleanse itself of human overpopulation by disease from time to time.
February 26, 2009
3:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
DragonInTheSky writes:
RockHawper.. Your ignorance is amusing. To assume I am some kind of pot smoking hippy dip because I believe other creatures on this planet deserve respect is absolutely ridiculous.
COL.. I appreciate your rational perspective, but I for one believe humans have messed and interfered with the process of nature for WAY too long. An example of this is the tree die off in the mountains. Many scientist believe a large cause of this is the restriction of natural forest fires over the years. Natural fires must take place in order to maintain the health of the forest. I say, whatever happens, let it happen.
Allow nature to take its course. It's about time.
February 26, 2009
3:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
Hank, isn't that why God gave us guns and cars? We're doing the best we can, just show a little patience!
February 26, 2009
3:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
DragonInTheSky writes:
COLi..After reading your post above, I see that you agree with me somewhat. You seem to be coming from both perspectives. I can't tell if you are for the reintroduction of wolves, or against it.
February 26, 2009
3:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
Are we not the parasites and the Earth our host?
February 26, 2009
3:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
Yep Hank...
February 26, 2009
4:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Dragon
Agree to a point especially with forest fires.......... But do not forget we are Nature. Yes it was humans that coined the phrase nature, but that does not eliminate us from the mix
About forest fires, there is a great book that talks about that subject and the 1988 Yellowstone fire was the emphasis......
Another thing on forest fires is that we can balance fires with thinning and accomplish both goals. The Hayman fire is a good example. The most devastating fact of the Hayman fire was not the fire......... but rather the ongoing impacts of erosion and the millions upon millions of dollars paid to fix that problem......... In fact the last big fire that occurred in that region was one of the reasons that that area was out of the short list of State Capitals for Colorado. Pemberton / WestCreek area. If you live in Denver, then costs are being paid by you as a water user. The erosion, flooding from that area has added great risk to the Denver Watershed. ie Cheeseman, Strontia and working towards Chatfield. Look at the $$$$$$$$ spent to fix this. Whatever happens - happens is not a bad thing in my book either, but realize that there are costs associated with it. Unless you promote the mandate of birth control, disease,war and outright Chaos theory of population control, we have to conserve..........even if no natural disaster(Hayman) happens again.
The Hayman fire burned through areas of prescribed burn areas, recent fires (Schoonover) and other "recent" burns along with thinning endeavors. Now that area is seeing alot more thinning and prescribed burns within Pike to alleviate the big one.
February 26, 2009
4:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Dragon
COLibertarian writes:
Dragon
First I am for reintroduction. I have volunteered in Wolf rescue and habitat related endeavors.
--------------------------------------
I am being realistic! I see both sides of the issue and have LIVED both sides of the issue. There is NO 1 right answer.
What I do not accept is the lack of dialogue, along with statistics plucked to tell only 1 side of the story.....and that goes for both sides. It takes away credibility and only hurts the reintroduction and the lives directly affected by ANY decision made on this subject. We need to be intelligent and respectful of either side so that the correct decisions can be made.
I will ask the same question based upon traditional ranges for elk and wolves........ Are you willing to displace the coyotes for the wolves that will ultimately do just that? Estes Park is not traditional habitat for the elk. Parker, Elizibeth, Denver, Ft Collins, CO Springs, Boulder and points east ARE.
I am willing for that to happen.....realizing that the communities that are screaming the loudest for this (Boulder types, Hey I am an old conservative type Hippy myself) will be the first directly and negatively impacted
February 26, 2009
4:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
I just had a thought along the "they were here first" lines: perhaps we should re-introduce the dinosaurs, Jurassic Park style. After all, they were here first. It would also make things a lot more exciting for everybody, though I'd hate to clean up behind the brachiosaurs...
February 26, 2009
4:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
Hey, how about eHarmony? Surely they can find a compatible puppy!
February 27, 2009
6:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Barb writes:
Man did not wipe out the dinosaurs, vendari01.
Here's an incredible book on how our federal government wiped out these magnificent animals (the gray wolves ) on behalf our "wonderful" livestock industry, using your tax dollars:
http://www.predatorybureaucracy.com/book
The livestock industry has done more damage to native predatory animals and their habitat than any other industry!!!