Buzz wether you agree or not if not for the B.S wolf reintroduction the herds would have no doudt still been above the 12,000 mark. Hunting had been used for 20 years trying to keep the numbers down and still thet weren't your own graphs show that.
Now introduce the wolf into the pic different story and by your analogy it was mismanagement after the wolf, mine is no B.S wolf and there would still be 12,000 + elk to support atleast a great opportunity.
Sure it was a [bleep] show, but it was no different in what I encountered hunting unit 38 with rifle for elk this year in Wyoming
Not true...have you ever read the EMP?
Familiar with Debby Barrett's bill? You know, the one that compels, by State Statute, that elk be held at or below the population objectives defined in the EMP?
If you did, you wouldn't make such unfounded claims as the herd would have been around 12,000. For starters, go look at the data from 1960-present. That herd has fluctuated a lot over the years. It wasn't until 1975 that the Northern herd hit 12K.
Even if wolves would never have been introduced, the MTFWP would be mandated by law to hold elk at or below the objective numbers, so you're just flat wrong that 12K elk would have been available to hunters.
Finally no, it wasn't mismanagement after the wolf, it was mismanagement all during wolf reintroduction. The mismanagement continued as the elk populations were declining and they were still issuing tags like they had 19K elk. Then when Barrett (R-Dillon) passed her legislation in 2003, compelling the FWP to wage war on elk to hold them at objective numbers...it was a foregone conclusion that elk would NEVER be allowed to reach 12K again.
That's still where we're at today, and wolf or not, the LAW will not allow that many elk to ever inhabit the Northern herd again.
Get your facts straight.
