I'm confused. You say they've "vastly changed the atmosphere of the mountains" and complain about the forest service making mistakes managing in the past, but you also say the wolve "barely have the pop above 100" and cite ranchers that have more losses from the mountain lions than the wolves. Are you arguing that the program is bad, or more of a no-op? I care far more about "demonstrated and sustained negative impact on ranchers' livelihoods" than I do about feeling a bit more abstractly apprehensive outdoors—I grew up in a different part of the boonies, but there mountain lions were the big threat, and I'd always carry a gun just because of the risk of them. Mountain lions seem far more scary/dangerous to me, personally.