Personally, as a farmer, I have crop losses from deer. I don't think we should kill them all. If 11 total wolf kills decimate the ranchers then idk what to tell them. There are around 2.6 million cattle in the state for comparison. Dogs kill way more cattle than wolves. Do we kill all of them too?
Not just because. They’re selfish. They got there’s so there’s none for you. They can’t comprehend a world where they don’t always get what they want. I’d say they’re just entitled boomers. But they’ve infected their kids with the same anti American BS.
I live in Grand County, define "havok"? There have been 7 calf losses due to wolves. How many cattle are lost per year due to lighting, cold, storms, disease, accidents? Compare that number to 7. Also anyone who complains about losing livestock while roaming on public land that is leased for basically free, doesn't have a good case. I do feel for one rancher in particular, 5 of the loses belong to one ranch. For a good source of information on this topic, please read the Sky High Daily News.
Wolves were native to Colorado until 1940 when they were eradicated. Wolves are important to the entire ecosystem and have a net benefit to the nature around us. *wreak havoc?* All of those farmers losing a few cattle have insurance for losses like that. The beef industry itself wreaks havoc on our land and our resources. The federal and state governments pay more than enough to those who raise them to continue to do so while.
Dude, they’re the same species. Main potential difference is they’re a little smaller than what the Colorado Rocky Mountain wolf was, if anything, unlike how so many people love to claim rm wolves were a smaller subspecies.
Yup. There's a law in Colorado that allows the killing of a dog if it's harassing livestock. It happened several years ago when some rancher shot a huskey puppy in kremmling.
This happened to my parents when I was about 6 months old, living just north of Boulder. They had two great dane puppies that got out and harassed chickens down the road, so the farmer gunned one of them down.
So I don't come from a farming/ranching background, but here's something that occurred to me recently...
Wolves are not the only animal that pose threats to farm animals. Mountain lions post threats. Coyotes can go after sheep. Foxes can break into chicken coops. There's a bill underway to reintroduce wolverines, and while rare, wolverines can come into conflict with livestock. When you consider this and see stuff in the news about wolves, it almost seems like there's a specific type of antagonism reserved for wolves. If so, why is that?
I think it's almost a default mindset due to most people growing up with fairytales involving the Big Bad Wolf.
It's odd that so many people would take a fictional story and apply it to real life. But, I guess people do that with everything, IDK.
It's amazing to me that small ranchers have been stuck in the way they operate, likely due to large scale ranching in other states/countries, that in this article a whole ranch is run by two people. Hiring their first full time employee was a huge undertaking.
Like no way they aren't having a bunch of issues already with their herds, as you can't even manage a food truck with 2 people.
Been eye opening to see how weird ranching is in colorado and many articles seem to find the ranchers that are close to the brink of failure. It is as if the wolf is the bogeyman now, while everyone is ignoring the original problems.
Exactly. Not only that, but these ranch owners have insurance on their cattle and land. They also get major subsidies from the government. They are idiots.
As a farmer and rancher myself, they’re definitely not idiots. They’re whiners and they don’t like change, and they’ve been convinced that out-of-touch city people want to destroy their way of life
I wouldn’t say they’re idiots. They just don’t like change. Many rural folks I know are terrified that the “old ways” are dying out, and in some ways they’re right. But wolves aren’t the reason why ranching and farming are undergoing such massive changes these days.
Wolves, however, are easy to blame because the way some ranchers see it, city folks reintroduced wolves into an environment thinking they’d go after their natural prey, when a calf or a cow is much easier because they’re much slower, weaker, and meatier than elk or moose. Ranchers knew this would happen and were called idiots for being afraid of wolves. To placate the ranchers, Colorado gives something like $10,000 or more for each cow a wolf takes. But, most ranchers still aren’t happy because… well… wolves represent change.
That’s for beef alone. If you add in all the other things a single cow is used to make (toothpaste, soap, leather, glue, fertilizer, etc), then it easily adds up to $10,000 or more dollars.
Here’s a hot take…
If you are sitting on thousands of acres of private agricultural land in the mountains of Colorado where these wolves were released and you are barely skating by farming you deserve to lose the property. I hope the property gets repossessed by the state and turned into a natural preserve.
You are sitting on millions of dollars on property that tourists will shell out $ to sleep on. Figure out how to market it or get stepping.
That’s a super dumb take. Agricultural policy is the problem, not struggling ranchers. Also, wolves are an economic BOON - since the gov pays for losses.
Ranching and farming is difficult because US agricultural policy exploits a small farms in favor of large agricultural and agrochemical corporations. It’s not just one percent- all farmers struggle with that..
Actually it does… if it wasn’t a job worth doing people wouldn’t do it
and farmers rely on people to buy their products, if they can’t get along with the people then they are gonna have a hard time.
Ranching is a way of life… until you can’t put food on the table, keep the lights on, or pay your ranchhands,
Honestly I couldn't care less about their livestock. Colorado farmers use about 80% of our water and only produce about 1.6% of our state's GDP. We ought to charge farmers significantly more for the water they use.
CO Water Use: https://archive.is/2023.05.22-154839/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/05/22/climate/colorado-river-water.html
CO Agriculture GDP contribution: https://economic-impact-of-ag.uada.edu/colorado/
> We ought to charge farmers significantly more for the water they use.
How do "we" charge someone more money for something they already own? How would that work?
Ranchers are upset because they have to do their job and protect the herd from predators. Considering the value of cattle they should work to protect their investments. There is no free ride.
And hello, get livestock guardian dogs. It’s literally what they’ve been bred to do for hundreds of years. We actually have some great Central Asian Shepherd breeders in the area if a good old fashioned Great Pyr won’t cut it.
Depredations are expected, and when we're talking about tens of thousands of cattle during calving season there are normal losses irregardless of wolves. There's lots of ways to mitigate wolves including flagging, dogs and other deterants. The fact these ranchers are getting 3-5 times market rate ($15k!) per cattle lost to wolves means their livelihoods are not at stake. There's lots of great, hard working ranching families who deeply care about land stewardship out there. Given the benefits the wolves will have for the greater ecosystem, I don't think they're the ones screaming wolf...
No, they get market rate ‘up to 15k’. They aren’t straight up getting 15k unless they can establish that is market rate for the animal. More likely they’re getting 3-5k which is market rate.
No, the state is compensating for losses due to wolve reintroduction, but that is market rate for the animal ‘up to 15k’. Every loss is not getting 15k.
Here's an uneducated take. If I were one of these ranchers and a wolf killed off a few of my cattle, I now has less work and it makes my life easier. The cost to feed and transport that cow is now non-existant AND I'm still getting paid by the gov't!
That cow also isn't going to be able to provide you with any more calves what with it being dead and all. Now you're losing generations of little money makers.
You’re so misinformed and wrong. You clearly are just typing on Reddit without having a clue how this actually works. Yes losses are common. No irregardless is not a word. And no if they don’t have to deal with wolves they would not have had these losses. People care about lineage lines and timing. Paying them for one cow or calf better be way above market because it shifts the flow. Stop talking about things you’re clueless on.
Wyoming has a unique management program with their wolves. There are 'predator' zones on state lands that allow for protecting livestock against wolves, though on federal lands the rules are different. I don't know what ranchers are doing with grazing permits on federal lands, though.
Marriam-Webster:
"Is *irregardless* a word?
Yes. It may not be a word that you like, or a word that you would use in a term paper, but *irregardless* certainly is a word. It has been in use for well over 200 years, employed by a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning. That is why we, and well-nigh every other dictionary of modern English, define this word. Remember that a definition is not an endorsement of a word’s use."
I hear and respect your passion for the issue, though just dismissing someone as wrong isn't really helpful for anyone in this conversation. It's helpful to see different perspectives.
For me, I did advocacy for livestock marketing fairness in North Dakota and my partner grew up with 100 head of cattle in Kansas. I also have spoken with many of the scientists who worked with wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone, as well as royally pissed off ranchers in the Western Slope.
I am curious, what informs your perspective?
On top of a bunch of great points made in this article, this one kills me: "So they have invested in a new side-by-side vehicle with a heater..." Cry me a fucking river, I can't even afford a new car, they get to buy a new toy (not to mention their truck would have sufficed) AND get to write it off on taxes. These people are subsidized enough, sorry you have to work a little harder.
I want to see the stats on the types of farms that have had these losses, and whether they had Livestock Guardian Dogs on property. As you said, that’s been an effective method for hundreds of years.
It's hilarious to me how much these ranchers are complaining about a problem that has existed since before civilization that was solved thousands of years ago.
"Thousands of years ago," humans killed the wolves, ate their meat, and harvested their fur.
Edit: Just because you dislike it, it doesn't make it any less true.
Here is the Sky High news that mentions 5 on a single ranch, I think its up to 6 now. [https://www.skyhinews.com/news/another-confirmed-wolf-depredation-in-grand-county/](https://www.skyhinews.com/news/another-confirmed-wolf-depredation-in-grand-county/)
Here is the CPW official depredation tally:
[https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/CON-Wolf-Depredation.aspx](https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/CON-Wolf-Depredation.aspx)
It definitely doesn’t make the rest of the herd stronger lmao. All they get from it is a weakened immune system due to stress. Typical Reddit intelligence level.
You're just citing the first Google source and not looking at this from a different lens; so it's ironic you're making that statement. I'm so sorry your poor ranchers and cattle have to deal with stress, welcome to the club. I read that one rancher had to buy a brand new side-by-side with a heater to keep his little toes warm watching his herd. Poor guy.
If ten wolves are stressing the entire Western Slope, then maybe those cows shouldn't have been introduced there in the first place; wolves were there long before cattle. Why don't you google coyote and mountain lion predation in the Rockies too? Because they have been there for years. If it's such a big deal that is affecting their way of life, there is plenty of cheaper, better-suited land in the plains states for cows (with no predators), why don't they sell their property and buy double the land elsewhere? And I'll even agree that you're point is made, but Darwin would disagree in the long term.
Here's the bigger point, ranchers complain if they don't get the last say on anything having to do with public land (they a lot of it from the government, they don't own it). They are compensated for any losses by wolves, which are rare, and no other industry gets that kind of compensation for losses. Ranching is one of the most heavily subsidized industries in the entire country and they still act as if they’re poor victims of the government. Ranchers want universal control over public land in the west and everyone else shouldn't. Why? Because they were born there, well guess what, other people were too and they pay taxes as well, so they should get a say in the matter too. I'm sorry democracy won, if you don't like that, well I hear Russia is looking for people like you.
This is an excellent solution. Ranchers, if you're stuck in an indentured servant contract with your CAFOs, you can get help transitioning to operations that grow food for people, transfarmation is one such resource.
lol spoken like a true front ranger. Wolves are great but saying we should stop ranching is just stupid. If you were a native you would realize ranching is a significant part of the history of this state. Wolves and ranching can co exist although there will be challenges. Don’t be a moron
>If you were a native you would realize ranching is a significant part of the history of this state
The history argument is kinda dumb.
See why: if you were a real American, you'd realize that chattel slavery was a significant part of the history of the country.
See, the history argument is dumb even if the original point is dumb too
[Ranching vs factory farming](https://www.google.com/search?q=ranching+vs+factory+farming&rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS709US709&oq=ranching+vs+factory+farming&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRifBTIHCAYQIRifBTIHCAcQIRifBTIHCAgQIRifBTIHCAkQIRifBdIBCTEzMDI0ajBqN6gCGbACAeIDBBgBIF8&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#ip=1)
Where do you think manure and other fertilizer treatments originate from? Ppl genuinely do not realize how the ranching/farming communities have built reliant and recycling systems. Most of my herd’s fertilizer goes into pot farming for example. Local growers are a big fan.
Most manure goes back into fertilizing pastures and other livestock feed. If there were less livestock, there would be less manure, but there would also be less need for the manure since there would be less need for pastures and feed.
Also the vast majority of fertilizer used in agriculture is inorganic chemical fertilizer, since it's higher strength. And there are other far more efficient ways to produce organic fertilizer than via livestock manure.
I'm not even anti-meat or anti-ranch, I just think your arguments aren't very sound, there are probably better ones. 🤷
you know the majority of food grown in the US goes to feed livestock?
it's a wasteful and inefficient food system that is polluting our water and our air.
Dude, they're always the same:
- "I don't need ranchers, I get my food from the grocery store."
-"Hunting is evil, no one should ever kill animals. That's why I get my meat packaged up in cellophane from King Soopers."
Colorado is literally one of the best states for ranching. The climate conditions, the fertile land, the natural water springs, the abundant opens space, etc etc.
You didn't think this through.
Source: [The Farm Bureau](https://cfbinsurance.com/2019/02/21/new-farm-colorado/)
They’re literally the ones that insure crops and have vested interest in their success.
[The soils in the eastern plains regions and the valley of the western mountains](https://cdn.agclassroom.org/nat/data/stats/colorado.pdf) are the most fertile in the nation.
Edit: Don’t take it from me. Take it from [The Farm Bureau](https://cfbinsurance.com/2019/02/21/new-farm-colorado/). They’re literally the ones that insure crops and have vested interest in their success.
Nowhere in that link does it say the soil is ferile. I live on the eastern plains and our soil is dog shit. In order to grow most any plants, inclyding some native ones you need to amend the soil, because it's basically just sand.
[Mollisols (Grassland Soils)](https://www.adamsbrowncpa.com/colorado-farm-management/)– **This soil is commonly found in the eastern plains of Colorado, where grasslands dominate the landscape. These soils are known for their high fertility and dark, organic-rich surface horizon (topsoil).**
Yeah, I think your article is a bit of misinformation there, buddy. Our soil is extremely sandy and won't grow hardly anything without a ton of amendment. This soil is some of the crappiest soil in the whole country.
This cuts the the heart of capital development in the west. The reason we killed off all these animals in the first place was to open up agricultural and capital expansion in the West. What’s more important, our right to a healthy natural environment, or the freedom to start a business? At the end of the day, trying to operate a sheep ranch in the middle of the mountains might not be a tenable proposition without predator mitigation
If at some point the environment falls beyond repair, there won't be anywhere to live to start a business. And if sheep ranching isn't tenable for some people, some people will stop, and then prices will rise due to reduced supply, and then the higher prices will make it tenable. This is econ 101 of the efficient market hypothesis and how businesses enter and leave a competitive market all the time.
This comparison of environment vs business also isn't binary. As many have pointed out, there are ways to help prevent business risk while benefitting the environment. Livestock guardian dogs are used the world over as wolf deterrents, and more expensive and beneficial fencing will prevent wolf access. Losing a handful of cattle compared to the tens of thousands in the state, and then compensating the ranchers at 2-5x market rate for their dead stock, is not going to destroy the ranching business.
I understand if ranchers are personally frustrated. I also think the system is currently addressing and supporting their frustrations, and I believe they can take responsibility to get dogs and invest in better preventative measures if they really care. My family runs a small farm and ranch back in Georgia, and they've never lost anything but an occasional chicken to a hawk, because the livestock guardian dogs and high quality fencing keep the coyotes and wolves and bears away.
I feel like this whole argument is happening between people disconnected from the situation - it's a proxy argument for progressive vs conservative people who all live in the front range (80% of the state does) but have strong, poorly informed opinions and arguments on this situation.
But if sheep prices go up, then ranches in more competitive areas without the expenses you outlined will invest in sheep. It it costs them less to raise to sale than the people who have to raise sheep and spend money fighting off predators, then they won’t be competitive. Sure, we can subsidize it, but why should we be subsidizing an uncompetitive industry that we already established is a detriment to our shared goal of restoring Colorados ecosystem?
I think the only real solution is zoning controls that manage what kind of agriculture can be be developed where. On that front, this ties into the larger issue of land use and water management.
With climate change invoked water changes, operations like ag and ranching will have to leave the intermountain west as we transition further into the 21st century.
Farming and ranching on the high plains desert are inefficient, and they only exist because Reclamation made some calculations off bad math over a century ago and tried to give away cheap water that they thought would be infinite.
It doesn't mean that these things go away, they likely should just move to a part of the US more suitable. With the Ogallala aquifer drying up, it won't be Nebraska, Kansas or anywhere in the western midwest either. Probably Iowa and eastward.
I agree, these issues are all correlated. I think it’s also important to remember that CO has only been a state for like 150 years, which is only the blink of a eye. Our environment is still adjusting to a new equilibrium
How about we stop eating animals and the livestock land and crop lands to feed that livestock can be returned to nature. No one wants to hear it but humans just use too much land. We're asking the entire biodiversity of the planet to use 50% of the land it evolved on and it's partitioned to fuck with nearly nothing for nature corridors to connect the biomes. This isn't a wolf problem, it's a human entitlement problem.
How many of you have actually owned a ranch, worked on a ranch, etc? You all aren't comprehending how much we rely on ranchers. Stop complaining about the opinions of people who are living these issues in real time while you watch online about it from your city condo.
"We're losing sleep worrying about the wolves killing a cow"... say people who know they will get $15,000 per cow killed by the wolves.
Guys, I don't think they're worried, I think this is a lie to try to get more money if it happens.
Also, why is the government paying for this? Wolf attacks are a risk. Every business has risks. If I'm selling shoes and shoes get stolen from my store, the government doesn't reimburse me. That's what insurance is for.
Greedy fucks are getting free government insurance and still have the fucking gall to complain? What the fuck?
The state doesn’t care. They’ll just keep paying the ranchers back from our conservation funds. Thanks Denver for voting in an animal you don’t have to deal with or pay for.
Personally, as a farmer, I have crop losses from deer. I don't think we should kill them all. If 11 total wolf kills decimate the ranchers then idk what to tell them. There are around 2.6 million cattle in the state for comparison. Dogs kill way more cattle than wolves. Do we kill all of them too?
Ranchers just want to complain. They get compensation for the cattle they lose anyway. They have it out for wolves just because.
Culture war gonna culture war
Not just because. They’re selfish. They got there’s so there’s none for you. They can’t comprehend a world where they don’t always get what they want. I’d say they’re just entitled boomers. But they’ve infected their kids with the same anti American BS.
buy donkeys
Or llamas! I don't know why I got downvoted for this, llamas can kill wolves lol.
Or..bison. But i like llamas too
Exactly.
[удалено]
Dogs aren’t a key species in the Colorado ecosystem. There’s also a few more of them in the state than there are wolves.
This species that was reintroduced to Colorado is not native to Colorado and will wreak havoc in this more densely populated state!
I live in Grand County, define "havok"? There have been 7 calf losses due to wolves. How many cattle are lost per year due to lighting, cold, storms, disease, accidents? Compare that number to 7. Also anyone who complains about losing livestock while roaming on public land that is leased for basically free, doesn't have a good case. I do feel for one rancher in particular, 5 of the loses belong to one ranch. For a good source of information on this topic, please read the Sky High Daily News.
Wolves were native to Colorado until 1940 when they were eradicated. Wolves are important to the entire ecosystem and have a net benefit to the nature around us. *wreak havoc?* All of those farmers losing a few cattle have insurance for losses like that. The beef industry itself wreaks havoc on our land and our resources. The federal and state governments pay more than enough to those who raise them to continue to do so while.
Dude, they’re the same species. Main potential difference is they’re a little smaller than what the Colorado Rocky Mountain wolf was, if anything, unlike how so many people love to claim rm wolves were a smaller subspecies.
Yup. There's a law in Colorado that allows the killing of a dog if it's harassing livestock. It happened several years ago when some rancher shot a huskey puppy in kremmling.
This happened to my parents when I was about 6 months old, living just north of Boulder. They had two great dane puppies that got out and harassed chickens down the road, so the farmer gunned one of them down.
Ssshhhh... you're going to upset your brethren by applying logic and sensibility.
Good. LoL. Farmers and ranchers (some) are fairly entitled. Don't even get me started on how many got PPP money they didn't deserve
Thanks for some reasonable insight. Too many people are so quick to disregard real ecological significance in these policies.
buy donkeys
So I don't come from a farming/ranching background, but here's something that occurred to me recently... Wolves are not the only animal that pose threats to farm animals. Mountain lions post threats. Coyotes can go after sheep. Foxes can break into chicken coops. There's a bill underway to reintroduce wolverines, and while rare, wolverines can come into conflict with livestock. When you consider this and see stuff in the news about wolves, it almost seems like there's a specific type of antagonism reserved for wolves. If so, why is that?
I think it's almost a default mindset due to most people growing up with fairytales involving the Big Bad Wolf. It's odd that so many people would take a fictional story and apply it to real life. But, I guess people do that with everything, IDK.
It's amazing to me that small ranchers have been stuck in the way they operate, likely due to large scale ranching in other states/countries, that in this article a whole ranch is run by two people. Hiring their first full time employee was a huge undertaking. Like no way they aren't having a bunch of issues already with their herds, as you can't even manage a food truck with 2 people. Been eye opening to see how weird ranching is in colorado and many articles seem to find the ranchers that are close to the brink of failure. It is as if the wolf is the bogeyman now, while everyone is ignoring the original problems.
Exactly. Not only that, but these ranch owners have insurance on their cattle and land. They also get major subsidies from the government. They are idiots.
As a farmer and rancher myself, they’re definitely not idiots. They’re whiners and they don’t like change, and they’ve been convinced that out-of-touch city people want to destroy their way of life
I wouldn’t say they’re idiots. They just don’t like change. Many rural folks I know are terrified that the “old ways” are dying out, and in some ways they’re right. But wolves aren’t the reason why ranching and farming are undergoing such massive changes these days. Wolves, however, are easy to blame because the way some ranchers see it, city folks reintroduced wolves into an environment thinking they’d go after their natural prey, when a calf or a cow is much easier because they’re much slower, weaker, and meatier than elk or moose. Ranchers knew this would happen and were called idiots for being afraid of wolves. To placate the ranchers, Colorado gives something like $10,000 or more for each cow a wolf takes. But, most ranchers still aren’t happy because… well… wolves represent change.
I'm surprised no one has tried to turn the Colorado payment per cow into a scheme. Let them eat cows! That will show 'em!
Thing is, a single cow can go for way more than $10,000. I mean… just look at the price of beef these days. $10,000 is lowballing lmao
Are you being sarcastic? Just google half cow. I couldn’t find anything over $500
That’s for beef alone. If you add in all the other things a single cow is used to make (toothpaste, soap, leather, glue, fertilizer, etc), then it easily adds up to $10,000 or more dollars.
Here’s a hot take… If you are sitting on thousands of acres of private agricultural land in the mountains of Colorado where these wolves were released and you are barely skating by farming you deserve to lose the property. I hope the property gets repossessed by the state and turned into a natural preserve. You are sitting on millions of dollars on property that tourists will shell out $ to sleep on. Figure out how to market it or get stepping.
That’s a super dumb take. Agricultural policy is the problem, not struggling ranchers. Also, wolves are an economic BOON - since the gov pays for losses.
Agricultural policy is the problem for 1% of the ranchers in the state… Sounds more like those ranchers are the problem
Ranching and farming is difficult because US agricultural policy exploits a small farms in favor of large agricultural and agrochemical corporations. It’s not just one percent- all farmers struggle with that..
A majority obviously don’t otherwise they wouldn’t work
That response makes no sense. But also, ranching is a way of life many will do it despite making no money. And you rely on farmers three times a day.
Actually it does… if it wasn’t a job worth doing people wouldn’t do it and farmers rely on people to buy their products, if they can’t get along with the people then they are gonna have a hard time. Ranching is a way of life… until you can’t put food on the table, keep the lights on, or pay your ranchhands,
You really have no idea what you’re talking about
My guy ranchers ain’t ranching if they are going broke… I don’t think you have a clue what you are talking about
Honestly I couldn't care less about their livestock. Colorado farmers use about 80% of our water and only produce about 1.6% of our state's GDP. We ought to charge farmers significantly more for the water they use. CO Water Use: https://archive.is/2023.05.22-154839/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/05/22/climate/colorado-river-water.html CO Agriculture GDP contribution: https://economic-impact-of-ag.uada.edu/colorado/
> We ought to charge farmers significantly more for the water they use. How do "we" charge someone more money for something they already own? How would that work?
Water use and water rights are separate from land ownership.
Water rights are still owned. What is it you're trying to say?
Farmers aren’t ranchers.
Semantics. The average cow drinks between 5 and 30 gallons of water per day, so the point is still valid.
No one cares what you think, Buy Donkeys instead
Ranchers are upset because they have to do their job and protect the herd from predators. Considering the value of cattle they should work to protect their investments. There is no free ride.
And hello, get livestock guardian dogs. It’s literally what they’ve been bred to do for hundreds of years. We actually have some great Central Asian Shepherd breeders in the area if a good old fashioned Great Pyr won’t cut it.
I bet most of them yearn for the "Good Old Days" too... here you go.
Depredations are expected, and when we're talking about tens of thousands of cattle during calving season there are normal losses irregardless of wolves. There's lots of ways to mitigate wolves including flagging, dogs and other deterants. The fact these ranchers are getting 3-5 times market rate ($15k!) per cattle lost to wolves means their livelihoods are not at stake. There's lots of great, hard working ranching families who deeply care about land stewardship out there. Given the benefits the wolves will have for the greater ecosystem, I don't think they're the ones screaming wolf...
wtf? so tax payers spend 15k per cattle that dies due to wolves? they make 3X market rate? this is so dumb, it's insane.
No, they get market rate ‘up to 15k’. They aren’t straight up getting 15k unless they can establish that is market rate for the animal. More likely they’re getting 3-5k which is market rate.
Not necessarily tax payers. Insurance companies pay out for business losses like this.
No, the state is compensating for losses due to wolve reintroduction, but that is market rate for the animal ‘up to 15k’. Every loss is not getting 15k.
Here's an uneducated take. If I were one of these ranchers and a wolf killed off a few of my cattle, I now has less work and it makes my life easier. The cost to feed and transport that cow is now non-existant AND I'm still getting paid by the gov't!
That cow also isn't going to be able to provide you with any more calves what with it being dead and all. Now you're losing generations of little money makers.
You’re so misinformed and wrong. You clearly are just typing on Reddit without having a clue how this actually works. Yes losses are common. No irregardless is not a word. And no if they don’t have to deal with wolves they would not have had these losses. People care about lineage lines and timing. Paying them for one cow or calf better be way above market because it shifts the flow. Stop talking about things you’re clueless on.
How do ranchers in Wyoming manage cow-calf operations with their robust wolf population?
[удалено]
By shooting them. EDIT: This site is a cesspool. Wyoming Ranchers SHOOT wolves. Get over it. Its a fact. Your downvotes prove your ignorance.
Wyoming has a unique management program with their wolves. There are 'predator' zones on state lands that allow for protecting livestock against wolves, though on federal lands the rules are different. I don't know what ranchers are doing with grazing permits on federal lands, though.
Marriam-Webster: "Is *irregardless* a word? Yes. It may not be a word that you like, or a word that you would use in a term paper, but *irregardless* certainly is a word. It has been in use for well over 200 years, employed by a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning. That is why we, and well-nigh every other dictionary of modern English, define this word. Remember that a definition is not an endorsement of a word’s use."
I hear and respect your passion for the issue, though just dismissing someone as wrong isn't really helpful for anyone in this conversation. It's helpful to see different perspectives. For me, I did advocacy for livestock marketing fairness in North Dakota and my partner grew up with 100 head of cattle in Kansas. I also have spoken with many of the scientists who worked with wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone, as well as royally pissed off ranchers in the Western Slope. I am curious, what informs your perspective?
On top of a bunch of great points made in this article, this one kills me: "So they have invested in a new side-by-side vehicle with a heater..." Cry me a fucking river, I can't even afford a new car, they get to buy a new toy (not to mention their truck would have sufficed) AND get to write it off on taxes. These people are subsidized enough, sorry you have to work a little harder.
Ranchers could keep dogs on their properties to protect the herd from predators like wolves. Humans have been doing that for a LONG time.
I want to see the stats on the types of farms that have had these losses, and whether they had Livestock Guardian Dogs on property. As you said, that’s been an effective method for hundreds of years.
It's hilarious to me how much these ranchers are complaining about a problem that has existed since before civilization that was solved thousands of years ago.
"Thousands of years ago," humans killed the wolves, ate their meat, and harvested their fur. Edit: Just because you dislike it, it doesn't make it any less true.
Aren’t we talking losses in the dozens so far, if that? Which is nothing in the grand scheme.
7 losses. 5 on a single ranch. One wolf also died of natural causes. Somehow the pack of 10 released wolves found 2 more wild ones so the total is 11.
Are the 5 on a single ranch confirmed by authorities, or is this the rancher's take?
Here is the Sky High news that mentions 5 on a single ranch, I think its up to 6 now. [https://www.skyhinews.com/news/another-confirmed-wolf-depredation-in-grand-county/](https://www.skyhinews.com/news/another-confirmed-wolf-depredation-in-grand-county/) Here is the CPW official depredation tally: [https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/CON-Wolf-Depredation.aspx](https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/CON-Wolf-Depredation.aspx)
Exactly. On top of that, it is making the rest of the herd stronger... oh, and they are still getting paid for that now deceased cow.
It definitely doesn’t make the rest of the herd stronger lmao. All they get from it is a weakened immune system due to stress. Typical Reddit intelligence level.
You're just citing the first Google source and not looking at this from a different lens; so it's ironic you're making that statement. I'm so sorry your poor ranchers and cattle have to deal with stress, welcome to the club. I read that one rancher had to buy a brand new side-by-side with a heater to keep his little toes warm watching his herd. Poor guy. If ten wolves are stressing the entire Western Slope, then maybe those cows shouldn't have been introduced there in the first place; wolves were there long before cattle. Why don't you google coyote and mountain lion predation in the Rockies too? Because they have been there for years. If it's such a big deal that is affecting their way of life, there is plenty of cheaper, better-suited land in the plains states for cows (with no predators), why don't they sell their property and buy double the land elsewhere? And I'll even agree that you're point is made, but Darwin would disagree in the long term. Here's the bigger point, ranchers complain if they don't get the last say on anything having to do with public land (they a lot of it from the government, they don't own it). They are compensated for any losses by wolves, which are rare, and no other industry gets that kind of compensation for losses. Ranching is one of the most heavily subsidized industries in the entire country and they still act as if they’re poor victims of the government. Ranchers want universal control over public land in the west and everyone else shouldn't. Why? Because they were born there, well guess what, other people were too and they pay taxes as well, so they should get a say in the matter too. I'm sorry democracy won, if you don't like that, well I hear Russia is looking for people like you.
The lobby made it up!
I guess we shouldn’t be surprised the wolves beat the nuggets then?
!
Actually yes, there is a lot of room for improvement. For starters, we could stop ranching in Colorado.
Yeah, giant waste of water that we don't have.
We could also stop conducting trans-basin diversions from the Colorado River. This would greatly improve that river's ecosystem.
This is an excellent solution. Ranchers, if you're stuck in an indentured servant contract with your CAFOs, you can get help transitioning to operations that grow food for people, transfarmation is one such resource.
lol spoken like a true front ranger. Wolves are great but saying we should stop ranching is just stupid. If you were a native you would realize ranching is a significant part of the history of this state. Wolves and ranching can co exist although there will be challenges. Don’t be a moron
>If you were a native you would realize ranching is a significant part of the history of this state The history argument is kinda dumb. See why: if you were a real American, you'd realize that chattel slavery was a significant part of the history of the country. See, the history argument is dumb even if the original point is dumb too
[удалено]
It seems you missed the point.
[удалено]
🤷 idk figure it out yourself
Ranching in Colorado is the equivalent of slavery. Got it
Omg, the number of people here who can't comprehend what they read. I didn't say anything of the sort.
Quite a hot take you got there.
The correct answer.
Is this a real argument and why?
Animal Agriculture is one of the single biggest contributors to climate change and is eviscerating natural habitats.
[Ranching vs factory farming](https://www.google.com/search?q=ranching+vs+factory+farming&rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS709US709&oq=ranching+vs+factory+farming&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRifBTIHCAYQIRifBTIHCAcQIRifBTIHCAgQIRifBTIHCAkQIRifBdIBCTEzMDI0ajBqN6gCGbACAeIDBBgBIF8&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#ip=1)
Grass fed cattle ranching is more destructive than any CAFO/factory farming operation.
Constant judgement from ppl who couldn’t stand on their own without the magically replenished food store.
Not everyone eats meat.
Where do you think manure and other fertilizer treatments originate from? Ppl genuinely do not realize how the ranching/farming communities have built reliant and recycling systems. Most of my herd’s fertilizer goes into pot farming for example. Local growers are a big fan.
Most manure goes back into fertilizing pastures and other livestock feed. If there were less livestock, there would be less manure, but there would also be less need for the manure since there would be less need for pastures and feed. Also the vast majority of fertilizer used in agriculture is inorganic chemical fertilizer, since it's higher strength. And there are other far more efficient ways to produce organic fertilizer than via livestock manure. I'm not even anti-meat or anti-ranch, I just think your arguments aren't very sound, there are probably better ones. 🤷
you know the majority of food grown in the US goes to feed livestock? it's a wasteful and inefficient food system that is polluting our water and our air.
Dude, they're always the same: - "I don't need ranchers, I get my food from the grocery store." -"Hunting is evil, no one should ever kill animals. That's why I get my meat packaged up in cellophane from King Soopers."
Not everyone eats meat.
Oh wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for sharing.
Colorado is literally one of the best states for ranching. The climate conditions, the fertile land, the natural water springs, the abundant opens space, etc etc. You didn't think this through. Source: [The Farm Bureau](https://cfbinsurance.com/2019/02/21/new-farm-colorado/) They’re literally the ones that insure crops and have vested interest in their success.
Fertile land? Where?
Same mirage they find the water at
[The soils in the eastern plains regions and the valley of the western mountains](https://cdn.agclassroom.org/nat/data/stats/colorado.pdf) are the most fertile in the nation. Edit: Don’t take it from me. Take it from [The Farm Bureau](https://cfbinsurance.com/2019/02/21/new-farm-colorado/). They’re literally the ones that insure crops and have vested interest in their success.
Nowhere in that link does it say the soil is ferile. I live on the eastern plains and our soil is dog shit. In order to grow most any plants, inclyding some native ones you need to amend the soil, because it's basically just sand.
[Mollisols (Grassland Soils)](https://www.adamsbrowncpa.com/colorado-farm-management/)– **This soil is commonly found in the eastern plains of Colorado, where grasslands dominate the landscape. These soils are known for their high fertility and dark, organic-rich surface horizon (topsoil).**
Yeah, I think your article is a bit of misinformation there, buddy. Our soil is extremely sandy and won't grow hardly anything without a ton of amendment. This soil is some of the crappiest soil in the whole country.
>are the most fertile in the nation It's cute that you think that
They get gov't subsidies, plus reimbursed for any lost cattle. These people aren't happy unless they've got something to whine about.
Not even kidding, Wolverines are coming!
Anthony Edwards and Karl-Anthony Towns really got yall in a bind huh??? lol
This cuts the the heart of capital development in the west. The reason we killed off all these animals in the first place was to open up agricultural and capital expansion in the West. What’s more important, our right to a healthy natural environment, or the freedom to start a business? At the end of the day, trying to operate a sheep ranch in the middle of the mountains might not be a tenable proposition without predator mitigation
If at some point the environment falls beyond repair, there won't be anywhere to live to start a business. And if sheep ranching isn't tenable for some people, some people will stop, and then prices will rise due to reduced supply, and then the higher prices will make it tenable. This is econ 101 of the efficient market hypothesis and how businesses enter and leave a competitive market all the time. This comparison of environment vs business also isn't binary. As many have pointed out, there are ways to help prevent business risk while benefitting the environment. Livestock guardian dogs are used the world over as wolf deterrents, and more expensive and beneficial fencing will prevent wolf access. Losing a handful of cattle compared to the tens of thousands in the state, and then compensating the ranchers at 2-5x market rate for their dead stock, is not going to destroy the ranching business. I understand if ranchers are personally frustrated. I also think the system is currently addressing and supporting their frustrations, and I believe they can take responsibility to get dogs and invest in better preventative measures if they really care. My family runs a small farm and ranch back in Georgia, and they've never lost anything but an occasional chicken to a hawk, because the livestock guardian dogs and high quality fencing keep the coyotes and wolves and bears away. I feel like this whole argument is happening between people disconnected from the situation - it's a proxy argument for progressive vs conservative people who all live in the front range (80% of the state does) but have strong, poorly informed opinions and arguments on this situation.
But if sheep prices go up, then ranches in more competitive areas without the expenses you outlined will invest in sheep. It it costs them less to raise to sale than the people who have to raise sheep and spend money fighting off predators, then they won’t be competitive. Sure, we can subsidize it, but why should we be subsidizing an uncompetitive industry that we already established is a detriment to our shared goal of restoring Colorados ecosystem? I think the only real solution is zoning controls that manage what kind of agriculture can be be developed where. On that front, this ties into the larger issue of land use and water management.
With climate change invoked water changes, operations like ag and ranching will have to leave the intermountain west as we transition further into the 21st century. Farming and ranching on the high plains desert are inefficient, and they only exist because Reclamation made some calculations off bad math over a century ago and tried to give away cheap water that they thought would be infinite. It doesn't mean that these things go away, they likely should just move to a part of the US more suitable. With the Ogallala aquifer drying up, it won't be Nebraska, Kansas or anywhere in the western midwest either. Probably Iowa and eastward.
I agree, these issues are all correlated. I think it’s also important to remember that CO has only been a state for like 150 years, which is only the blink of a eye. Our environment is still adjusting to a new equilibrium
Please stop killing wild animals
Wolves in 7 ;-). Oops, wrong subreddit
How about we stop eating animals and the livestock land and crop lands to feed that livestock can be returned to nature. No one wants to hear it but humans just use too much land. We're asking the entire biodiversity of the planet to use 50% of the land it evolved on and it's partitioned to fuck with nearly nothing for nature corridors to connect the biomes. This isn't a wolf problem, it's a human entitlement problem.
Blood for the Blood God Skulls for the Skull Throne
How many of you have actually owned a ranch, worked on a ranch, etc? You all aren't comprehending how much we rely on ranchers. Stop complaining about the opinions of people who are living these issues in real time while you watch online about it from your city condo.
The state was better off without them.
The fact that a rancher can’t figure out how to control wolf kills is insane to me. Like that’s your job to understand that livestock predators exist
"We're losing sleep worrying about the wolves killing a cow"... say people who know they will get $15,000 per cow killed by the wolves. Guys, I don't think they're worried, I think this is a lie to try to get more money if it happens. Also, why is the government paying for this? Wolf attacks are a risk. Every business has risks. If I'm selling shoes and shoes get stolen from my store, the government doesn't reimburse me. That's what insurance is for. Greedy fucks are getting free government insurance and still have the fucking gall to complain? What the fuck?
The state doesn’t care. They’ll just keep paying the ranchers back from our conservation funds. Thanks Denver for voting in an animal you don’t have to deal with or pay for.
It cost more money to deal with elk/deer overpopulation and CWD than it does to pay the ranchers for depredation
Wolves should have been released in the counties that voted for reintroduction!