What's new

Wolves in Utah

You should be for wolves in Utah and Colorado. Greater overall numbers will lead to less protection/restriction. Would you rather Montana, Idaho, Wyoming support wolf populations on their own? Think about it

The more we have, the more we get to shoot. Increased revenue for the state. That's not all bad.
 
Different species of wolves this go around. I agree though, they won't go extinct. You also have to consider that the elk/moose numbers were much higher when people weren't around too.

I don't like wolves bc they kill cattle, and ranchers can't hardly do a damn thing (legally) to protect them, and they don't get reimbursed that well either.

The different species thing is a bit overblown. They are the same wolves, in part. They are missing the timber wolf though, which was a small part of the competing population, I have read estimated at around 15% of the previous wolves in Yellowstone region were timber wolves, and the rest were gray wolf.

The ranching thing is a problem, because we have pretty much built our way of life around it. Either we need to change how we get our food, or allow the predators to be killed in designated ranching areas, although that might not work either. It's a legitimate concern though, and once the wolves get into the populations of cattle and sheep, they basically have to be killed because they have a hard time adjusting to staying away from herds.
 
How do you feel about them? They haven't officially been recognized yet, but plenty of people have pictures and spottings. Personally, I think there is no natural need; humans are plenty competent at culling the herds. We manage them already.

The reason I bring this up now:

View attachment 4497


I found that yesterday about 10 miles above Kamas. That's getting pretty deep into Utah and well away from seclusion. There is a minute chance that print is not a wolf, but considering it was not accompanied by any human or horse print on a very wide trail, coming down the trial not up, it's most likely not some extremely large lost dog. It's not a cougar either. It left 1/2 to 3/4 inch claw marks. Cougars don't leave those.

The question that begs to be asked is what kind of impact have they had on the locale? When riding here in LA, I run into coyotes all the time. I've even seen them come down into my neighborhood to, presumably, hunt for loose cats and dogs. I don't have a problem with them because I chose to live in an area that is close to Griffith Park, one of the biggest if not the biggest recreational parks in the area.
 
The more we have, the more we get to shoot. Increased revenue for the state. That's not all bad.

Exactly.

I would add that I think it's time for western states to start proposing Wilderness areas, predator reintroduction, etc in eastern states. :)
 
What about the coy wolf? Have you guys heard about that? It's the eastern coyote. It's like 1/4 wolf, 2/3 coyote and the rest domestic dog breeds. Apparently they now number over 1 million, and are pretty aggressive, even have killed some humans.
 
What about the coy wolf? Have you guys heard about that? It's the eastern coyote. It's like 1/4 wolf, 2/3 coyote and the rest domestic dog breeds. Apparently they now number over 1 million, and are pretty aggressive, even have killed some humans.

Not related, but there are people who breed wolves with domestic dogs...those people should be shot. Dangerous "pets".
 
Exactly.

I would add that I think it's time for western states to start proposing Wilderness areas, predator reintroduction, etc in eastern states. :)

Montana needs to set up a lottery draw for one tag for a grizzly bear. Would rack in the $$$$$$.
 
I've never seen a wolf in Utah but have ran across a huge mountain lion on east side of Zion.
 
Not related, but there are people who breed wolves with domestic dogs...those people should be shot. Dangerous "pets".

He didn't breed them, but my dad bought one. I HATED THAT ****ING thing.
At about 4 years old (after biting me multiple times) it cornered me in the barn, I grabbed a spade and smacked it across the head as hard as I could. Knocked it silly and then shot it about 10 times. **** that "dog."
 
Not related, but there are people who breed wolves with domestic dogs...those people should be shot. Dangerous "pets".
Agreed.
Hope they are not breeding the wolves with pitt bulls
 
Cool video. I wonder how much of what it says is true. It sounds plausible, but feels a bit overstated, especially given the timeframe.

I was able to find a twelve page paper written up about how elk migration is influenced by wolf introduction/relocation, including how they gathered the data over the course of 363 days. This illustrates the beginning of the cascade quite well.

Please PM me and we can discuss delivery of it to you, if you'd like.

There's also this terribly long link of a 15 year study Shortened, to make mind safe
 
Last edited:
Please enlighten me.

Include numbers.

Numbers? Don't have them. We don't even know how many wolves we have man, you aren't going to get accurate numbers anywhere.

Anyways, many deaths occur from the hazing by wolves, particularily with pregnant cow elk/does/moose etc. The stress causes early births, which lead to either DOA or killed by wolves/other animals. You don't need to believe it, I know there aren't a bunch of studies that can prove it, but I've seen it. I know people who have seen it. It's why elk are moving into places they never were before. Just common sense, tbh.
 
Numbers? Don't have them. We don't even know how many wolves we have man, you aren't going to get accurate numbers anywhere.

Anyways, many deaths occur from the hazing by wolves, particularily with pregnant cow elk/does/moose etc. The stress causes early births, which lead to either DOA or killed by wolves/other animals. You don't need to believe it, I know there aren't a bunch of studies that can prove it, but I've seen it. I know people who have seen it. It's why elk are moving into places they never were before. Just common sense, tbh.

Well of course you don't. Why would you look at studies that people did with legitimate numbers when you can run with gut feeling and anecdotal evidence?

Here's an excerpt from another actual study:

Abstract: We examined interactions between wolves (Canis lupus) and domestic calves (Bos tauras) within a grazing allotment in central Idaho, USA, to evaluate the role of wolves on calf survival and movements. During the 1999 and 2000 grazing seasons, we radiomarked 231 calves/year-representing 33% of the calf population--on the Dia- mond Moose Association (DMA) grazing allotment and monitored their survival and movements relative to wolf distribution. Overall, calf survival was high (295%), with relatively few mortalities (n = 13) among the marked population. Of the 13 calf mortalities, 8 were unrelated to predation (pneumonia, unknown natural causes, fire), 4 were wolf predation, and 1 was coyote predation. Calves selected by wolves were younger than the surviving cohort by an average of 24 days (wolf-killed: 31 Mar ? 13 days [mean birthdate ? SE], n = 4; live population: 7 Mar ? 1.6 days, n = 207; P < 0.05). Calf movement patterns and group size did not vary relative to the level of spatial overlap with wolves. However, vulnerability to predation appeared to be correlated with spatial proximity of calves to wolf home ranges and rendezvous sites. These results suggest that in our study area, the overall impact of wolves was not significant on either calf survival or behavior.

5 calves in 231 died from predators; wolf or coyote. 2.1% Let's be generous and use that whole 13, and round to 5%. So, feeding on calves, or causing stress related calf deaths, and blaming wolves for all other natural death phenomenon.. just seems trivial at best to me. Weigh that to the benefits gained by keeping some of the top predators around, as illustrated by the video posted yesterday and many, many documented studies.. it just seems fair. Educate yourself at scholar.google.com; just type in trophic cascade. You'll see study after study showing the gains, from small to large.

All that's not so say if you see a wolf or wolf pack actually preying on your livestock let them have the cattle. But most aren't talking defend your property, they're talking extinction or trail of tears level control. This is just an unnecessary knee jerk reaction to an old fear that's been demonstrated benign in latter times.
 
You're talking about cows when I didn't even mention them in my post. So you clearly don't have the numbers either. Keep on being pretentious though!
 
You're talking about cows when I didn't even mention them in my post. So you clearly don't have the numbers either. Keep on being pretentious though!

Forgive me for assuming the only claim I'd imagine you, as always taking the bumpkin route, making. That is my bad, and I apologize.

But if we wanna talk natural food web, why do we care how many baby moose/deer are dying? History proves that they balance each other out every x years. Wolf introduction in Yellowstone is unanimously considered a success in bringing back healthy wildlife, plant life, and waterways.

So if there's no argument for cattle, and a neutral argument for/against on natural wildlife in the area, and weighing that to the benefits of the trophic cascade brought out by wolves, then the answer is even simpler; let them be. We'll be better off having them.
 
Why do we care? Because it has an impact on an important financial sector for state governments in these rural northern states. No biggie though, just people's jobs.

And I still disagree on the cattle impact. I can guarantee for a fact that herds in Montana have been hit by them, but they won't call it one unless an official sees it occur...and that's going to be unlikely.

Lastly, you're smart, but you communicate like NAOS. It doesn't make any of this enjoyable.
 
Back
Top