Jump to content


Photo

National Park Service to Shoot Elk


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Rowdy Yates

Rowdy Yates

    Never Logs Off

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,632 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 03:15 PM

SCI newsletter
National Park Service to Shoot Elk
Colorado?s Rocky Mountain National Park plans to use park employees or contractors to shoot 200-700 elk over the next four years. After that, another 25-150 would be killed annually for 16 years. The goal is to reduce the current elk population of 3,000 down to 1,200-1,700. Biologists say the elk have overgrazed, hurting other animals and plants because of the loss of habitat. Public comment on this plan may be submitted in writing by July 4 or at a series of four meetings being held in Colorado this week. The reason the NPS generally uses park employees or contractors instead of recreational hunters to manage wildlife on Park Units is because under NPS policies, unless the statute establishing the unit mandates or allows sport hunting, hunting is prohibited. SCI is looking into filing comments and will keep our members apprised of the situation. For more information, visit the Park website at www.rocky.mountain.national-park.com/. (Source: yahoo.com)

I'm not familiar with this park so I'll leave ot to the Colorado folks to relate to this. I think it odd they don't open this up for hunters and special tags and not use U.S. dollars to accomplish this.
"Keep the sun forever at your back, the wind forever in your face, and may forever God bless you out there on the trail."

#2 McBruce

McBruce

    Marketing

  • Managers
  • 2,155 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:shooting/ rifle/blackpowder/handguns/archery/ shotguns. atving, photography ( scenic and wildlife ) Being out in the Mtns of Colorado any chance I can get.

Posted 25 May 2006 - 10:29 PM

my understanding on this...
its a national park.
thus it would take an act of congress to get it opened up to public hunting.

with all the special intrest groups, peta people and such.... do you think congress would step out and vote on that ? LOL.

I've seen articles were they are talking it will cost Hundreds of thousands for special sharp shooters to be contracted to thin the herd.


gov at its best sometimes.
McBruce
Live what you believe
Believe what you live

#3 Larry $

Larry $

    Totally Addicted

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,449 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 May 2006 - 08:54 AM

Morons...
Elk: it's what's for dinner!

#4 Ironranger

Ironranger

    Always Here

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 342 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, MN

Posted 26 May 2006 - 04:40 PM

Couldn't have said it better Larry!! I would add a few explitives to that also... :rolleyes:

#5 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 May 2006 - 05:55 PM

I just heard on the news that the bill for shooting will be 18 million over a 20 yr period. If they would allow hunting they could make money on the deal. Go figure.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.

#6 McBruce

McBruce

    Marketing

  • Managers
  • 2,155 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:shooting/ rifle/blackpowder/handguns/archery/ shotguns. atving, photography ( scenic and wildlife ) Being out in the Mtns of Colorado any chance I can get.

Posted 28 May 2006 - 10:58 PM

here is the story that ran in our local paper.



BOULDER - A 20-year plan to thin the burgeoning elk herd in Rocky Mountain National Park could cost $18 million to kill some animals and disperse others, park officials said.

An estimated 2,200 to 3,000 elk live in the park, overgrazing vegetation that is also important to other wildlife including songbirds, beavers and butterflies, biologists say. Elk numbers have escalated because the animals have few predators and no hunting is allowed in the park.

The park's goal is a herd of 1,200 to 1,700 elk.

Park officials outlined the proposed program and its estimated costs during a public meeting Monday. The park's favored plan would involve killing up to 700 elk annually for four years. After that, an additional 25 to 150 elk would be culled annually for 16 years.

The costs would come from hiring extra staff or a contractor to shoot elk, building fences to protect vegetation, transporting carcasses, testing them for disease and processing the meat.

"Doing something like this is not going to be cheap, for sure," said park Superintendent Vaughn Baker. "But we're talking 20 years."

The park's preferred plan calls for killing elk at night with silencer-equipped guns in part to minimize disturbances to park visitors.

Park officials said they recognize that some people are upset by the prospect of killing elk in the park. While most recognize that something needs to be done to manage the population, there are contentious disagreements over the best method, said park biologist Therese Johnson.

"For and against wolves. For and against hunting. And we have heard from people who prefer fertility control to killing the elk," she said.

Congress would have to approve any plan to allow hunting in a national park.

A draft elk-management plan released last month did not suggest releasing wolves in the park, but park officials have said wolves would best meet environmental objectives and do the least damage. Any proposal to release wolves in Colorado would have to be considered by federal and state agencies and likely would meet strong opposition from ranchers and others.

Some people at Monday's meeting expressed dismay at the thought of killing elk. Others questioned why the park waited so long to do something about the growing elk population.

"Fewer elk are going to help all of us," said Wally Wedel, who owns a cabin near the park.

Wedel said elk are crowing out deer and damaging private property.

The park is accepting public comments until July 4. It has scheduled other public meetings this week in Loveland, Grand Lake and Estes Park.
McBruce
Live what you believe
Believe what you live

#7 silvertip-co

silvertip-co

    Totally Addicted

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southern Colorado
  • Interests:hunting, fly fishing, long range shooting, hiking, camping, panning gold, reloading

Posted 29 May 2006 - 06:47 AM

Government Idiots.

I guess the land is too sacred to manage the elk by hunting.
SVENSKA50@HOTMAIL.COM

NRA LIFE MEMBER

#8 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 May 2006 - 06:56 AM

Sure looks like hunting them would still be the most viable option.

The option of contracted shooting is way too much of my money.

The wolf option has it's downside too in that wolves don't eat just elk. Infact if there is easier game than a 400 - 800 pound animal it is my bet that they go for it first second and third. Also when the herd gets down to its target population you still have the wolves to contend with. Importing one species to control another species has never worked as promised and sometimes not at all.

Now about contraception. When this was first proposed by the tree/animal huggers they came up with a concoction that was neither tested nor thought out. As far as I know that is still the case. I do know that it certainly does not work on whitetail deer captive herds where it was tested. Plus as far as I know no tests have been conducted as to cross contamination to animals or people who may eat the meat from a treated animal. I asked for test results from one organization that advocates this all I got was a blank stare and I am still waiting for facts.

To hunt the Park about all that would have to be conceeded is a few days a year of closing the park to the general public and another day or so to count the money coming in. There are Parks that do allow hunting so it is not against the law, just not in this park.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.

#9 RobertR

RobertR

    Hunting Resource

  • Moderators
  • 312 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 May 2006 - 10:07 AM

This is what bothers me the most about are goverment and there regulations etc.

The goverment is like a big bully and what thay say goes, right or wrong and public oppion means nothing because its already in writing by the time thay anounce it. The other thing that rubs me the wrong way is the government seems to be able to kill at will but if the hunter is mentioned its a dirty word. So when the government does this thining of game the antis dont speak out much ? could they be one in the same, hand in hind pocket.
Posted Image
I'M NOT AFRAID OF COMMITMENT I'VE BEEN HUNTING AND FISHING MY WHOLE LIFE!
Montana Hunting Discovering Montana

#10 Rowdy Yates

Rowdy Yates

    Never Logs Off

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,632 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 May 2006 - 11:36 AM

See I see a parallel to the deer in the city and in the city parks here. And the deer population was so out of control the car/deer accidents were escolating rapidly. Some cities around Ohio have opened up the parks for bowhunters since guns aren't allowed in the city plus no noise or hunter orange alarming the public or the anti-hunter groups. Well until they run an article in the paper and then crap started and ruined the hunting for several weeks. Antis came out in droves to the parks walking there dogs and blew the hunts.

National Parks should be able locally arrange a shut down of the parks for several weeks during hunting season and let loose the hunters to take as many elk as they can take out. Save the millions and feed the starving from some meat donations. But I here you it will take an act of congress to allow such sanity to happen.
"Keep the sun forever at your back, the wind forever in your face, and may forever God bless you out there on the trail."

#11 McBruce

McBruce

    Marketing

  • Managers
  • 2,155 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:shooting/ rifle/blackpowder/handguns/archery/ shotguns. atving, photography ( scenic and wildlife ) Being out in the Mtns of Colorado any chance I can get.

Posted 29 May 2006 - 01:12 PM

our gov and socitey have reached the point that rational thought gets so twisted and warped that you don't even come close to dealing with the issue at hand. SOMEHOW SOMEWAY, this whole issue of thining the elk herd at Rocky National Park will end up with some twisted misguided law about a spotted owl in orgeon.

Plain and simple, allowing hunting would be the easiest and cheapest. ( but I don't think congress has the nads to allow that ) Hiring someone to thin the heard, is an option. close a section of the park while this goes on. I know when I was at yellowstone, they had areas closed for one reason or another.
going out at night with silencers???? that seems pretty extreme messures to go to, so some tourist don't get offended at the echoing sound of a rifle shot.

I honestly don't think the cows will take their pills daily and I'm pretty sure that the bulls won't use the condoms that are being handed out to them by high school guidence counslers.

we don't want to bring up the option of wolf.
if they think the deer and smaller animals are being damaged now by over population of elk, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out, a wolf would kill a deer or a prong horn before it would go after an elk. And hasn't history taught them anything. When you introduce something like that into the system, its there forever. you can't just flip a switch and say. stop killing elk we have a small enough herd now.

Nope it would be nice to have a special draw for the Park and allow hunters in :)
but I doubt that will ever happen.

wonder how ya get the job of being the contracted hunter????
McBruce
Live what you believe
Believe what you live

#12 Leo

Leo

    Hunting Resource

  • Administrators
  • 3,155 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Carolina

Posted 29 May 2006 - 02:01 PM

In the past I've participated in culling programs.

It's not as much fun as some might imagine.

Bottomline, when they start talking about contracting population control they've got serious problems. At that point the population is so out of control, it's on the brink of a major ecological disaster. Traditional hunting methods won't get the job done.
Posted Image

#13 iamyourhuckleberry

iamyourhuckleberry

    Can Charge Rent

  • Authors
  • 944 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2006 - 12:04 AM

I have two thoughts on this subject. They're both interlinked. I am sincerely happy that hunters will not be allowed to participate in this culling. Bear with me....

The elk tend to concentrate. Where the elk concentrate, the spectators will concentrate (along with the media and members of every anti-hunting organization out there). Now, in comes the hunter who proceeds to blast elk's brains out. :o :o :'( go the spectator, :curse: :curse: :curse: go the anti-hunters, :no: :no: :angry: go the media. The hunter is made out to be a worthless, ruthless, cold blooded killer! Any support that we have from the fence sitters (nonhunters which are totally undecided on the issue of hunting) is now out the window! The headlines would read "cruel hunters kill helpless park elk for no apparent reason other than to stick heads on their walls".

Is this what you guys really want? Trust me, this is what you'll get!

Nay, I say! Let the government take all the hits! They can afford them..we, as hunters, cannot! In the meantime, write each and every one of your state senators and congressmen. Let them know about this Huckleberry guy. Inform them that good ol Huck will take care of their problem during the darkness of night. He'll be swift in his execution and he'll even buy the bullets necessary to get the job done! It won't cost the government a single penny! He'll even make sure the meat is put to beneficial use! He'll leave zero trace and the spectators will enjoy the park in the light of day. B)
Posted Image

Lurking in McDonalds near you!

Confidence makes the hunter, PSE makes the bow.

#14 Phil

Phil

    Never Logs Off

  • Authors
  • 2,379 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2006 - 04:56 AM

PA Gurka for hire.....price= 1 plane ticket ;)
Posted Image

#15 iamyourhuckleberry

iamyourhuckleberry

    Can Charge Rent

  • Authors
  • 944 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2006 - 06:02 AM

SOLD to one Pa. Gurka! You'll need to help with the bullets...

Since I live so close to the park, You'll have to bunk and chow with me Phil. Again, I do not want the government to spend a red cent on this endeavor. It might take us a month or so. Will Mrs. Phil be ok with that? B)

Edited by iamyourhuckleberry, 21 June 2006 - 06:07 AM.

Posted Image

Lurking in McDonalds near you!

Confidence makes the hunter, PSE makes the bow.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users