[cliffy]

Wolves are decimating our Western ungulate herds at an alarming rate. THANK YOU none too much for REINTRODUCING wolves among us. Gray Wolves hybridize with Coyotes and Timberwolves and Large Wild Dogs. A pure Gray Wolf is now a rarity of nature. Wolves ONLY fear People BECAUSE we wield firearms afield and near towns. Imagine an unarmed hiker in a desolated area: WOLF FOOD ALA CARTE. I fear for our children playing in our own back yards. The INSANITY of PROTECTING WOLVES must END! Actually it should have never restarted, since Our Forefathers had the commonsense to irradicate these beastly devils long ago, but some crazy group of people with no commonsense decided to re-introduce them on to American Soil. FOR WHAT PURPOSE! Thank God that Dinosaurs cannot be re-established or we'd have to battle them! WOLVES are dangerous enough for now; thank you too much. Our Forefathers were smarter than we seem to be two-hundred years later. Does anyone bother to READ history, especially European history? Our Wolf situation shall ONLY worsen shortly. cliffy

[wyocarp]

That is the way that everyone feels out here Wyoming except for the sierra club types and the rich idiots that move here or buy land here for a cool thing to do but don't really live here. I have no problem shooting every wolf on sight.

[caribou]

LOL!LOL!LOL!LOL!!!!!

Good one. I try to shoot every one I see.:D I hunt them for Fun and profit.

Funny ....its nice having wolves here in Alaska.:evil:
They keep our animal poulations in check and healthy.
They kill the wounded, the sick and the old. It keeps the Caribou Herds healthy and sickness's such as cronic wasting disease and brucillosis in check, because the sick animals are eaten, removed from the herd before it can spred through our 500,000 Strong local Caribou herd.....

But wait a minute? Shouldnt the Wolves that have been here as long as the Caribou have wiped them out 10,000+years ago?

How come our Caribou population has grown, and been stedy for 14 years?

Howcome there are no old Inupiaq Eskimo storys about Wolf attacks?

How come the last guy in this region, (The size of Illinois) that was killed by a Wolf attack that gave him Rabies, did so in 1938??

I have never even had a wounded one attack me.

How come I catch Black, Grey and white wolves, and why do the Wolves here EAT Coyotes rather than breed with them?

How do Wolves know that "We" have guns?

What religion are these "Beastly Devils"? and how can an animal other than "Man" be evil?

The world may never know.....:fire:
It is America.

[Sinixstar]

Guess i'm one of "those" people then. Something about all that NRA literature I used to get about conservation and saving species that are on the verge of extinction back in the late 80s/early 90s must have really sunk in. (If i'm not mistaken they actually mentioned wolves specifically on more then one occasion)

Damn those hippie liberal NRA types!


To make this gun related....

I'm not quite sure i get the mentality of the "get rid of them because they're so dangerous" argument - especially coming from this forum. Any statistics as to the number of people killed by wolves per year? I'm willing to bet it's a fraction of the people killed by guns...

[BullpupBen]

I don't even know where to start in criticizing the OP.. :what:

[Harve Curry]

There was a Canadian grad student killed and ate by wolves about one or two winters ago. The main stream press said it was probably a bear, but no bear sign was found and the bears were in hibernation at the time. Plus the ground was covered wolf sign and the man was full of wolf bites.
Just like when a positive thing happens with a handgun it goes unreported in the news, reintroduced wolf depradations on domestic animals and wildlife goes unreported in main stream news.

Alaska and parts of Canada do not compare to the population density of the lower 48 states. There is no room for wolves to coexist with hunting or ranching

The same organizations and people who want to take away your guns, tax ammo, imprint serial numbers on bullets, outlaw lead bullets, are the same people who are anti hunting and pro wolf.
.
Anyone who sides with the wolf reintroduction in the lower 48 states, who cannot realize that fact has their head in the sand and is standing along side with anti gunners and anti hunters.

[Art Eatman]

Count me in as one who believes that reintroducing wolves into ranching country is about as intelligent as reintroducing boll weevils into cotton country. Not much ranching in Alaska, so species interrelationships there aren't really germane to the discussion.

I'm dubious toward the idea about interbreeding with domestic dogs and coyotes. If it happens, it seems like an uncommon event. I've lived in a quasi-wilderness area for twenty five years where house-dogs range freely and we have plenty of coyotes. I only recall a couple of times where folks have had "coy-dogs" be born.

By and large, though, the reintroduction is a Done Deal. About all that can be done is to get legislation passed that allows hunting.

As far as the impact of reintroduction on people who ranch in New Mexico, it is fact that livestock losses have increased since the program began. For some, the losses resulted in losing their ranches. There is--in practicality--no recourse in the law, and the people who have put the whole deal together bear no accountability for the harm done to others.

[Harve Curry]

As I understand it there is no pure genetic wolf, they all have DNA of dog in them. There was some speculation awhile back that if they weren't pure wolf being reintroduced and protected then they wern't covered br the Endangered Species Act, but somehow that was ruled out and a genetically impure wolf is a protected species.

[22lr]

Wolfs are a major problem in the lower states were they don't fear humans. But again we also have a problem with coyotes so..... Also ranchers arnt able to kill the wolfs that attack their herds so that's a major issue there (cows are worth a pretty penny). At least in the midwest there inst a need for wolfs. Coyotes are doing fine, and we dont have 500k populations of wild caribou (that would be kinda awesome though). Wolfs are a serious problem out here. Granted Indiana doesn't have this problem yet but I can understand why farmers are getting mad about cows getting killed. Id say let Alaska keep the wolves and ill just enjoy them from afar:D.

BTW nothing against Alaska, its God's best work of creation.

[caribou]

OK, Im in unspoiled and unfenced Alaska, and We kinda have an opposite look at the hybreed, it is "dogs" , as in Huskys, that are not 100% "dog" but part Wolf.
Back when they had a rabies or an accident, that ended in their dogteams demise,old time Eskimo's would raid Wolf lair and take the pups to pull their sled....a primitive "Bailout Plan" that could keep a guy and his sled moving.
Wolves are fairly pure, never seen them any different.

Up here we have Reindeer herds that the Wolves target, certainly. Vigulance over the stock is the only solution.Wolves dont do fences and dont read No tresspass signs, and naturally look at Beef as Meat.

I see your point totally about domestic stock...
.....its this BS about wolves being more dangerous and attacking that aint right. Evil? Thats just stupid.
Wolves often eat up what the Bears cannot in a sitting, and Bears often take food away from Wolves. Ive watched them myself feed on a Moose, and a Bear was about 20 yards off napping with a full gut.
I dont know what killed the student, but up this way, with a long tradition and interaction with both Dogs and Wolves, its Feral Dogs are the big fear, Its because wild Dogs are not at all afraid of people, and some "Chain Dogs" that get loos in a village are shot on sight. Theres more than a few deaths because of wild dogs up in alaska as well a mnore than a few scarred up kids who were set a pon...point too, Dogs and Wolves have the same print.

The hungriest Wolf laughs at the best fed Dog.

[ArmedBear]

Why not reintroduce some more buffalo, actually native, before introducing non-native predators from other areas? Buffalo were symbols of the West; wolves weren't. And we wiped out the buffalo; we know it, we have records of it, we have pictures of it.

Bringing Canadian wolves into Idaho, where they killed the existing native wolf population, is hardly preserving an endangered species. It's political correctness and t-shirt environmentalism taken towards their predictable destructive conclusion.

Why don't we see calls for reintroducing the Grizzly to Los Angeles or San Jose? Hell, the thing is the symbol of California, despite being extirpated from the state many years ago. Would that be too inconvenient for the Sierra Club, having predators around somewhere they actually go, instead of places they only see in pictures on calendars in their condo kitchens?

[dogrunner]

This thread kinda reminds me of the NY to Florida transplants that wanted "written assurance" that their newly purchased lake front home's pond was 'gator' free!

Just as our 'gator's' eat the occasional poodle or two year old whose stupid parents have fed it from their dock for years, those wolves will take the occasional domestic critter........deal with the miscreant, but wolves like these stinkin' reptiles (unlike those transplants) CAN be managed.

Come to think about it tho, I'd damned well trade you Westerners ALL the NY/NJ types we're overrun with for some wolves!......Even pay you to ship the things this way!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Wheeler44]

The hungriest Wolf laughs at the best fed Dog. Caribou, soooo true. It seems, after participating in a similar thread some time ago, that folks that have actually lived around wolves have a respect for them (I grew up in SE Alaska) and others have an unnatural fear of them. Kinda reminds me of anti-gunners that way.

Oh soon enough, if you keep participating in this thread, you'll hear about small ranchers driven out of business by wolves and folks will chime in saying that they've seen "a forest of rotting elk carcasses" all killed by wolves, for sport.

So I ask you Caribou, Have you ever witnessed a "forest of 'bou carcasses, rotting on the tundra? Have you ever seen a wolf kill that wasn't cleaned up pretty good by the wolves and the ravens? Have you ever heard of wolves killing for sport and leaving their kill to rot?

Lots of folks (that have probably never even seen a wild wolf) will claim all of the above and more.

So enjoy this tread for what it is... a little Christmas fun.


Wheeler44........an admirer of the wolfs incredible hunting and survival skills.

[leathermanwave]

In places where I used to see tons of deer sign and plenty of deer now I can hunt all day and be lucky if I see 1 deer. What I do see a lot of is wolf sign.

I believe that wolf numbers are underestimated, the story below confirms my belief.

Recently near here there was a pack of wolfs began killing cattle. The fwp originally numbered them at 10. After tracking and killing 8 the wolfs continued business as usual. The fwp then decided that the rest of the wolfs in the pack would have to be killed, which they now claimed numbered 5. When it was all said and done they killed 27 wolfs out of a pack they claimed to number 10.

Yes, I have seen wolfs and I still believe that the only good wolf is a dead wolf.

[ArmedBear]

Just as our 'gator's' eat the occasional poodle or two year old whose stupid parents have fed it from their dock for years, those wolves will take the occasional domestic critter........deal with the miscreant, but wolves like these stinkin' reptiles (unlike those transplants) CAN be managed.

#1. This is not the same as people who show up and don't like the local wildlife. This would be more like, let's see, if some enviro-wackos in DC decided that there weren't enough gators, so they imported a whole mess of huge crocs from Australia and declared them endangered -- the crocs would wipe out the local gator population, and you wouldn't be allowed to shoot one in your own yard. That's what the wolf thing is like. These are NOT native wolves -- they're all dead now, their throats having been ripped out by these introduced Canadian Timberwolves.

#2. You're not allowed to deal with the miscreant. It's a Federal crime to do so.

Nobody is asking for protection from the native wolf packs. Nobody is complaining about wolves that can be "dealt with."

[dogrunner]

Armed Bear!

Obviously your ranchers are less imaginative, and a LOT more law abiding than some of these Florida Crackers.....I've hunted on leases with a lot of cattle and an extremely minimal gator population..........Shoot, shovel and shut up obviously didn't originate in your neck of the woods.

Still, I'd trade you, say five wolves for 15 New Yorkers.

[jeepmor]

Seems cliffy took some blather hook, line and sinker. Someone got some forceps, we'll need the ones that reach down the gullet a long ways to remove that hook.

[R00KIE]

I am all about being able to hunt another species, that would be cool.

But out here west we just have to watch them kill off the cattle with "expenses reimbursed for dead livestock so long as you can prove it was a wolf. . . so far around here, tons of dead livestock and no money back in the ranchers pockets!" little bit of a touchy subject for a few ranchers out west.

We killed em all off the ranches and farms here once before, we can do it again.

Just put those radio collars somewhere special. LOL

[Javelin]

OP please cite one time a wolf has attacked anyone in the United States.

Sounds like the only one crying wolf is you.

:)

[mio]

i dont mind having them running around for 2 reasons.

1) i dont own cattle

2) there are very few around here. i havent seen one although twice last year my wife did on her way to college.

i do think they should give us a season on them in michigans UP though since they are out of hand there. the biggest problem they are having with them is that packs grab bird dogs. thats something a coyote wont do and i can see why those guys up there are getting so peeved.

[ArmedBear]

Shoot, shovel and shut up obviously didn't originate in your neck of the woods.

I thought it originated in Wyoming, but I'm not sure. I always figured it came from a place where there weren't konvenient kanyons to kick the karcass into.:)

I'm not saying that nobody does that... I'm saying that, if caught, he faces criminal penalties that are simply wrong.

[caribou]

Yaaaaaaaaaa........

going by personal observations here...

Im all for killing Wolves that are attacking Cattle, Bears and Cougers too.
Hell, hire me to shoot 'em and well call it a "Job" LOL!
Its too bad that you guys cant. Kinda like being told to not resist a rape, so "You wont get hurt".....
At least in AK, If its attacking, were shooting. If I lived where you fellas do, Id just tan it at home and hang it on a wall.

I hunt wolves now and then.
The first thing a Wolf eats is the tounge. Thn they start at the ass, and eat up under the tail, going for the fat on the haunches.
Then they tar back the belly skin, and often dont even break the intestines, and strip themm of fat, and go on eating the soft hot organs.

Some wolves eat, some watch, all get a turn.
when the eating is done, there is quite a bit left, and the wolves move off to high ground and nap, watch the kill, and eat again as soon as they can.

I watch them eat every time, because a full Wolf cant run fast or far:evil: Thats when I go after them.

Ravens and Fox eat what they can on a carcass, if the Wolves move off.

They do not kill for fun, but they dont go hungry either. Theywill have three animals down and eat them one at a time.

If you kill wolves off, others will move into the territor as fast as they find it empty. I hunt the same places, over the years, and there are always "More".

Geeee, howd that happen?:o Wolves make babies and they roam.

You should all be able to hunt them.

[Grizfire]

Imagine an unarmed hiker in a desolated area: WOLF FOOD ALA CARTE. I fear for our children playing in our own back yards.

So what! Children, as well as everyone else, need to learn a little humility. The only species that is out of control is our own.

If you can't handle nature, then maybe you should recreate at central park.

[leathermanwave]

So what! Children, as well as everyone else, need to learn a little humility. The only species that is out of control is our own.

We own the world! Not Wolves! Children do not need to be eaten to learn humility. Humans are way better than wolves. How would you feel if your own children were killed by wolves.

Don't take this personal but if the human race is really out of control I will give you my standard answer; feel free to bump off yourself. Or even better feed yourself to the wolfs.

[caribou]

Oh ya,...... well , we will be sure we kill ourselfs in front of the Wolves....they are a bit like Snakes and suspect anything they didnt kill themselfs. ~LOL!!!!!~

Really, Wolves dont kill kids, and they have certainly had the chance to do so where I live. We have resident Wolves that den up every year up the creek about 2 miles from ou summer camp, and they have never bothered us.
They did, however, kill two of our Huskys, and tore a third one up pretty bad.
Territorrial , I'm sure.


Bears , however have eaten my porrage, broken my chair and slept in my bed.
If were gonna hype up B.S. at least do it with an animal that actually has a record of hunting, killing and eating people.

This is a funny thread!:D

[dstark]

I personally have nothing against wolves, maybe because I live where there are no more wolves, or maybe because I was raised with a wolf/huskey dog growing up. If they are killing live stock thats one thing, but to hate them just because there wild, you might as well hate every bear, lion, coyote, and every other predator in the states. They have all attacked livestock and humans. I see no point to this thread except the op's personal hatred toward wolves.

[leathermanwave]

I agree that wolves rarely attack humans but the sure can ruin hunting in an area.

[Idano]

In places where I used to see tons of deer sign and plenty of deer now I can hunt all day and be lucky if I see 1 deer.

That's not because of wolves here in Idaho it is because the Utahan's depleting our Mule deer herds with their party hunts.

I agree that wolves rarely attack humans but the sure can ruin hunting in an area.

In the back country where there are no roads to hunt or where the four wheelers are not allowed the wolves are the only thing moving the game around for for the lone hunter off the beaten path.

Soon as everyone is good and scared the wolves will get totally delisted and we'll have more targets. I am all for more targets so don't be bad mouthing the reintroduction of dinosaurs:evil:

[TCB in TN]

So what! Children, as well as everyone else, need to learn a little humility. The only species that is out of control is our own.

If you can't handle nature, then maybe you should recreate at central park.

Sorry Bud, most folks can handle nature, its a combination of foolish nature is "right" attitudes and our Gooberments insistence on "helping" nature that gives us so many problems.

Re-introducing a large, agressive top predator into an area with a large number of domestic animals is a poor idea to start with. Doing it and tying the hands of the ranchers is just plain wrong! I am a firm believer that humans can co-exist with the vast majority of nature, but humans and certain parts of nature just don't mix, and folks oughtta think things through enough to understand that.

[Art Eatman]

As far as the reintroduction and the protective laws, in cow country, never forget that there are many people in the private sector who hate the idea of allowing ranching on public land--and they have sympathizers in the employ of the USF&WS.

One example: I picked up a copy of the Sierra Club's magazine, back some fifteen years ago. In it was an article about a hiking trip in Navajo country. Now, here they are on Navajo land, as guests, and some of the group got all upset when they saw hoofprints of domestic livestock. "Ruining the land!" and all that nonsense. Well, folks, they lobby and they vote and they can't tell sheepdip from wild honey when it comes to knowledge of any sort of agribusiness. But they are a big help to the citified folks in Congress who pass dumb-butt laws.

Sure, I doubt that a wolf or a pack would attack an adult human. But I don't see why it would be highly improbable that a child would be immune. Me, I started running the boonies when I was seven years old, at which time I wasn't so big that I would not have looked like a potential supper--but in 1941, central Texas was kinda short on wolves, bears and mountain lions.

My attitude is real simple: I have an inherent right to make my environs safe for me, my familily, my livestock and my pets. When I'm left alone, I'm the most harmless guy you can imagine. If my little chunk of world is threatened, it's a whole different deal and I don't care if the predator has two legs or four.

[Harve Curry]

Here's some info;

http://wolfcrossing.org/

[IdahoLT1]

Im kinda on the fence on the wolf issue. My biggest problem is that the Feds stepped in to run State wildlife. Theres something called the 10th ammendment that allows States to run their own wildlife programs(more specifically to run any program that the federal govt. doesnt/cant/wont) based on THEIR interests, not the pencil pushers in DC or residents of other states. I would be much happier if Idaho residents voted on whether they wanted to reintrouduce a non native species or keep things the way they are.


And the bison numers are ~1 million(acoording to some reports) in the lower 48. But about 3/4 are farmed/ranched.

[Wheeler44]

And the bison numers are ~1 million(acoording to some reports) in the lower 48. But about 3/4 are farmed/ranched. Don't worry, soon someone will post how those bison should all be killed off too. It's for the children err ranchers.

[Grizfire]

We own the world! Not Wolves! Children do not need to be eaten to learn humility. Humans are way better than wolves. How would you feel if your own children were killed by wolves.

Don't take this personal but if the human race is really out of control I will give you my standard answer; feel free to bump off yourself. Or even better feed yourself to the wolfs.

I don't think we "own" the world. And saying we are "better" than wolves is just anthropocentric. Of course you say this, your a human.

I think you know how I'd feel if my children were killed by wolves. But I'm not going to over protect them. They are going to learn to grow a pair.

Should we kill the bald eagle, they can snatch a small child.
Should we kill cougar, black bear, grizzly, wolverine, poisonous snakes.

Wouldn't homicide be more efficient than suicide for population control? Sorry, but I'm not going to do either of these (against your wishes).

Now the argument against wolves due to problems with ranching is a good one. This is a tough situation and there needs to be some management here.

But being anti-wolf because them may kill us is just sissy. And it sounds familiar...

"lets destroy wolves and outlaw reintroduction because they may kill us" sounds a lot like "lets destroy guns and outlaw guns because they may kill us?"

[wyocarp]

Caribou, what works in Alaska isn't always going to be the same in the lower 48. Just like the grizzly. I am good friends (actually graduated with) an Alaskan hunting guide and we were talking just last month about the differences between grizzly in the lower 48 and grizzly in Alaska. We agreed that typically they respond to the presence of people differently with grizzly in the lower 48 being more unpredictable and more aggressive towards people.

As for wolves, they are growing in number in the lower 48, possibly beyond what the pressures of society and hunting will be able to tolerate. They have affected hunting! And they have been seen as much more curious with campers this past year. I think time will change the statistics on how many humans are hurt yearly by wolves (I think it will rise if hunting isn't allowed).

[Harve Curry]

What it comes down to is those who have original thoughts derived from personal study and observations, and those who's minds are made up and channeled by teachers/educators, watch television, read mainstream news.

[R00KIE]

I found a rule-book. It lays it out pretty simply who is in charge here. . its not the wolves ha ha.

Genesis 1:25-26 (New King James Version)
25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Main Entry: do·min·ion
Pronunciation: \də-ˈmi-nyən\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1: supreme authority : sovereignty
2: absolute ownership

[caribou]

Oh ya, I agree on most points here, once we have removed Human Emotion from the equation.:rolleyes:

We, "Man" do have dominion over the Animals, at the same time,and in the same breath, we are the Top of the Food Chain.
Wolves are a close compeditor on the Deer family resource, in that food chain.

Wolves and their predidations on Domestic stock is the only "real" problem I think. Seems Cougers and Bears do too, but not in packs.
I think a Rancher has an inherit right to defend his property, and should be able to kill any Animals that attacks his herds.


NorthAmerican Wolves just do not attack people without some extream circumstane; wounded, rabid, and attempted domestication by "Wolf lovers".Wild animals are a nervous lot when in human company, even after a couple generations.

Here , too, we have a huge population of wolves and our Caribou, Moose and Sheep populations are doing fine.,Back in 90/91 we had a warm spell inJanuary that had freezing rain cover the feed of the Sheep in 3 inches of ice. Most starved or were weakend enough not to have lambs or escape wolves. The strog survived, But the Wolves got fat.
Today, the Sheep are back and we can hunt them again.
For me, a long look has shown me that over time, Wolves keep the animal populations healthy.
Its the short term of 15 or so years that is hard to accept.

You know, its man that hunts and gets the "Best" as in "Ah got ah Goood Buck!" shooting the biggest and best of the gene pool dies, usually when its time to spred those genes.
Wolves get the end of the herd, as in the sick, weak, old and wounded. I have watched this many times, among the Caribou. If it cant keep up,or is somehow stupid, it gets eaten. Only the strong breed.
Imagine just how good it is during hunting season, with wounded and lost dead Deer are there for the eating? Comming across a few Dead Deer that have been finished off by Wolves might give the impression that they just kill for fun, but what if every thing you have in the kItchen and refrigerator was put on the table and left there till eaten?

Man is eliminating the bigest and the Best of the populations and removed the natural tool that keeps sickness and overpoulation from occuring.
When Caribou numbers boom,and they are eating up their food supply so do wolves, and for a short time, the Wolves really clean up. Then their populations too are downtrended,as their food supply has depleted and the result is self regulation , as they have fewer pups when times are lean, and the weak Wolves starve, become weak and are killed by the pack.


I think some ecosystem's are outta wack down there with having no Wolves for so long, in some places, the Biggest and Best being hunted for so long and the sick, weak and diseased are the ones breeding. This makes for an unhealthy Population.
Then you re-introduce wolves into this smagasbord of food, easy kills on fairly "uneducated" Deer not surviving their first encounter with a pack, and fences that dont let animals get away....Hmmmm.... guess whos comming to dinner, tail wagging.
Some place's are gonna need alot of culling to be healthy enough to boom in population again,but it would be strong when it did, geneticly.
I can easily understand how wolves would ruin hunting in many areas.
Remember the Arizona Kibab Deer in the 30's?

I love to kill Wolves.
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/HPIM1856.jpg
And chop them up
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones
0102.jpg
And wear them for warmth, fun and fashon....LOL!
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/goodoldones0328.jpg

[leathermanwave]

Amen to that. rookie

[brandonc]

Wolves always eat what they kill, never leave garbage, and practice fair chase...sounds better then most humans.

Seriously though where I live (AZ), there are wolf packs, but I don't see what makes a wolf different from any other critter that lives here, cougar, bear, jaguar, or even deer, except that people fear them more. They should be legal game, when they have a stable population or start taking to large a toll on the population of other animals.

I have never worried about being attack by any animals when in the wilderness, I am more likely to get a disease or struck by lightning. they don;t even pose a threat to farm animals around here, since our wolves only live in the most rugged mountains, no where near any ranches.

[interlock]

prey numbers control predator numbers. not the other way round

[moosehunt]

Prey numbers control preditor numbers. You're correct, and that is exactly why the gun control advocates are the ones that promoted wolf reintroduction in ther lower 48--no prey (that's called deer, elk, etc) equals no hunting, thus no reason for people to have guns. OUTLAW THEM!

Those that support the wolf reintroduction have no clue as to what is really happening (in the lower 48--Caribou, in AK it is a TOTALLY different situation, and you speak no foul language--for AK).

Anyone with a tad of knowledge of what these wolves are doing in the lower 48 doesn't follow the 3 S's, sound as they are, --they just shoot and walk the other way. Works for me!

[Harve Curry]

brandonc QUOTE:
"Wolves always eat what they kill, never leave garbage, and practice fair chase...sounds better then most humans. "

Tell that to the single Mom rancher 10 miles north of me that lost 8 mother cows to a pair of wolves that only ate the milk udders and went on to the next cow. The calves were never seen again. Wolves like any dog or cat like to play with their food and have favorite parts to eat.

[caribou]

Totally spot on.

But look at the whole picture;

How much Beef can two Wolves eat?
Take away that meal, and their gonna kill another one untill they are killed....its eat or die for them, and with a "Replacement Cow" needed for the next meal now that the rancher removed the first course I'm fairly certain.

It would be best to leave the carcass to the Wolves and set traps there.

Eating the udders sound right, as its a "Fatty" place on a cow, the first thing any wild animal will eat. Tounge too. Quick, fat and easy to get without a mouthfull of hair. They do the same to Caribou. Difference is theres no one interfering with the meal in the wild ....(usually...LOL!)and the animals have the opportunity to return and eat.

Uninterupted, they would have had a chance to eat the whole cow, before killing another, as its easier to keep eating than to kill again....Thats not the Wolves fault, so its on to the next meal.

If the calfs dissapeared , then the Wolves dragged them off where they could finnish the meal.

How damn stupid are Cows? Stupid but valuable.
I eat Beef because I hate Cows.:evil:

It takes at least 4 wolves, taking turns molesting a Moose over two or three days, so that it doesnt get enough sleep and is exhausted enough for the pack to take on.

I hope the rancher shot the Wolves , because there would be no stopping a pair like that from the easy "welfare" meal a bovine seems to make...LOL!!!


Im sure that Wolves, like all predators , "Plays" with its food, they often show personality.....Geee Whizzzzzzzzz, I have even played with my food, before killing it......LOL!

[ArmedBear]

Fair chase?

Is it ethical, or legal, for a group of 10 human hunters with 2-way radios to form a circle, trap an animal, close in on it, rip its guts out with knives, and start eating it while it's still alive?

Nothing against wolves, really. Evolution made them as they are. But to think of predators in terms of "fair chase," one way or another, is what we as kids used to call "retarded.":rolleyes:

[Harve Curry]

Sorry Caribu but your assumptions are wrong. The carcasses were left there waiting for USFW to come investigate. Wolf depradations have been happening long enough around here now that the kills are treated like a crime scene. It takes 3 confirmed Incidents to condem a wolf for removal or shoot them. A confimed incident may contain 1 or a dozen cattle horses or sheep or whatever......... so 3 dead animals does not make 3 incidents. It has to be 3 different places and dates, number of domestic animals killed doesn't enter into it. Photographs, measurements are taken of bite size, tracks and spore, by government investigators. They decide if it was wolf kill or not.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I'm all for reintroducing wolves and thus restoring our full indigenous species spectrum to the North American eco-system, PROVIDED THAT there are reasonable laws allowing culling by humans; i.e. (1) that a rancher or other person can shoot them without being charged with anything, if they are attacking livestock or people, (2) that each state's wildlife department has the right to regulate their numbers as they see fit, by establishing hunting criterion: season dates, numbers killed, etc.

The problem is NOT the re-introduction; it's the re-introduction *combined with* these intrusive unreasonable rules which come with harsh criminal and civil penalties if you shoot one. I think that if you shoot one and claim self-defense, the burden of proof should be on the gov't to prove you wrong, not upon you to prove it WAS self-defense (or defense of your livestock). If we have reasonable RULES about culling, then they'd learn much more quickly and more surely to avoid humans and human activity (including harassing livestock).

It takes 3 confirmed Incidents to condem a wolf for removal or shoot them.

See, that's what's wrong with this picture, not the re-introduction or allowance of continued survival itself. Again, the burden for shooting is much too high. It should be one incident as reported by the shooter of an *attempt* to kill or injure livestock or humans, with the gov't bearing the burden of proving your allegation of defense wrong.

[moosehunt]

They made two errors in the wolf re-introduction: The wolf specie and the location. They should have introduced European wolves, because they are much more prone to enjoy human meat, and the introduction should have been in Central Park (NYC) where there are plenty of vermin to eat!

[caribou]

LOL!!

I just have to laugh with this thread.:rolleyes:



Id love to hunt Central Park, but Downtown Washington DC is where the TRULY DANGEROUS WOLVES ARE.:evil:

Cut a swath through them, and we might get somewhere with this problem.

[blkbrd666]

***??? The OP is from Michigan.

[ArmedBear]

I'm all for reintroducing wolves and thus restoring our full indigenous species spectrum to the North American eco-system, PROVIDED THAT there are reasonable laws allowing culling by humans; i.e. (1) that a rancher or other person can shoot them without being charged with anything, if they are attacking livestock or people, (2) that each state's wildlife department has the right to regulate their numbers as they see fit, by establishing hunting criterion: season dates, numbers killed, etc.

Agreed.

[Harve Curry]

The above statement doesn't work because reintroduced grey wolves are protected by the Endangered Species Act and the full forces of the Federal Government will come down on you for any violation.

At this time it costs about 1/4 million dollars to reintroduce one wolf, that is your tax payers dollars It was costing almost 1 million dollars per wolf. How do you like them apples? I think our soldiers could use the equipments that money could buy or how about a pay raise! Better then giving it to a dam wolf and ruining a local economy over it.

Another item that goes over peoples heads who are simpethetic or sitting on the fence for wolves is this:
The lower 48 states has lots of hunters and a huge industry of hunting elk and deer. I'm talking about western and southwestern states, very dry even the mountains are high deserts. If you have ever spent a week in the south west hunting you'll know what I'm talking about. It doesn't support large populations of elk and deer already. We are going to lose our good elk and deer hunting because the wolves will get them first. I'm for people first.

[moosehunt]

Hello? The lights are on, but is anybody home? "You guys don't get it"??? I think maybeso you don't read so well. Let's try the most simple English, since you didn't understand what I said before. Wolves don't fit in the lower 48. They should not have been re-introduced.

[Harve Curry]

Moosehunt,
I was refering to reply number
51 and others that are pro wolf. I read all your replies to this topic and your right on target.
I'm going back out and call some coyotes..........

[cassandrasdaddy]

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/annualrpt06/Table%205b.pdf

http://www.pinedaleonline.com/news/2008/04/Fourwolveskilledforl.htm


http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2005/03/17/news/wyoming/11d9b701618c0ad787256fc6006c3410.txt


Wildlife considerations

Wolves could be used to control populations of wild ungulates, another Colorado speaker said Tuesday.

Mike Bond of Littleton spoke about the effects wolves have on elk, deer, moose and other animals. Bond represents hunters on the Colorado wolf working group, which was established about a year ago after Colorado officials decided to develop plans to address wolves they expect to migrate to their state.

Bond did his homework and reviewed data from 71 studies done on the impacts of wolves on ungulates.

"I was astonished by what I learned. I determined wolves have a minimal impact on wild ungulates unless those ungulates are already impacted by other factors," Bond said. Those other factors include harsh winters, overgrazing and disease.

Most of the studies showed that wolf predation can have a negative effect on ungulates, Bond said, but wolves don't have a significant controlling effect on wild ungulate populations.

What that means to Bond and other Colorado hunters, he said, is that wolves can have a positive effect in helping move elk and deer around, and wolves can be instrumental in getting rid of old and sick deer and elk.

Bond went so far as to suggest that a few wolves be introduced into Rocky Mountain National Park to help reduce the elk population there. Hunting is not allowed in Rocky Mountain National Park, he said.

Wildlife managers have estimated that Colorado has more than 100,000 elk above the state's herd objective, Bond said.

The presence of wolves in Colorado would mean some elk, especially sick animals, would be killed by wolves, he said, and wolves might chase some elk out of protected parks, so hunters could kill some elk.

"Wolves may the best management tool we have for chronic wasting disease," Bond said.

Bond said he was "substantially opposed to having any wolves in Colorado" when he was appointed to the working group.

"I was astonished that as I talked to friends and hunters, I found a lot of hunters weren't opposed to wolves," he said. "This annoyed and shocked me."

It's also important to take into consideration the economic advantages that wolves can bring to small Western towns, he said.

Tourists travel from all over the world to see wolves, and if there was a limited, managed wolf reintroduction in Colorado, towns there would benefit, Bond said.

Star-Tribune correspondent Shelley Ridenour can be reached at sridenour@bresnan.net.

[cassandrasdaddy]

more cry wolf

i thought they didn't kill em?
http://www.jg-tc.com/articles/2008/09/04/features/outdoors/doc48c09b10a0390295122354.txt

Montana wolves eradicated because of livestock depredation

By Lee News Service

Federal trappers have killed the entire Willow Creek wolf pack near Hall because of chronic livestock depredations.

The pack included an alpha male wolf, alpha female, a yearling and two wolf pups.

Each year, several wolf packs in Montana are eradicated because of conflicts with livestock, but it’s not a common practice, said Liz Bradley, wolf management specialist for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

A male wolf from Idaho migrated southwest of Hall and established the Willow Creek pack in the summer of 2005. For three years, the pack roamed private property near grazing livestock.

But last year, there were several reports of wolves in the area harassing livestock and one report of an injured calf.

Then in April, wolves killed a calf and a lamb belonging to two different landowners. The pack had grown to 10 adult wolves and three pups at that time.

Given the size of the pack, its proximity to private property and the number of livestock in the area, FWP – the agency charged with wolf conservation and management in Montana on nontribal lands – initially decided the best long-term solution was to reduce the pack by half.

Federal agents killed five of the adult wolves last spring, Bradley said.

During the summer, state wildlife managers stepped up monitoring efforts to reduce future conflicts. In addition, they built visual barriers between livestock and the wolves, and hazed the pack out of calving pastures and off private land.

Ranchers helped by removing livestock carcasses immediately when they died of natural causes, Bradley said.

“Everyone was working together to keep it from happening again,” she said.

Then on Aug. 14, it was confirmed another wolf killed a calf in the area.

This time, wildlife managers decided to take out three of the five remaining adult wolves in an incremental fashion. There had been turnover within the pack during the summer, so biologists thought that eliminating a few more members of the pack would stop the depredations.

Then, on Aug. 23, another calf was killed by a wolf on private land.

At that point, state officials decided to take out of the remainder of the pack, a plan that was executed by federal trappers on Friday.

There’s quite a bit of livestock in western Montana, but it’s not often that packs chronically depredate, Bradley said. Last year, an entire pack was removed in the same area.

Often livestock and wolf conflicts increase in late summer because cattle are grazing across open range and wolf pups are becoming more mobile so there’s more pressure to feed them, Bradley said.

[caribou]

Interesting Cassandrasdad, think i might agree.....LOL!

No matter the subject, emotions are always challanging science.

What a Thread!:scrutiny::barf:

"Are we Men or are we Devo??!!"

~L.O.L.!!!~

[Harve Curry]

Wolf related links:
www.770KKOB.com

www.wolfcrossing.org

Wolf Deaths in Press Release Aren't Accurately Portrayed
(article from a local newsletter)
Recently the Center for Biological Diversity issued a press release. Read the release in it's intended context in a prior email.

We tend to disagree with just about everything the CBD has to say about the cause of death for their mortality chart. The first three wolf pups actually did die of canine parvovirus but that diagnosis doesn't fit the CBD agenda. The francisco pups were killed and eaten by their parents in the den this happens in the wild as well. Perhaps this has more to do with the perceived low numbers of wolves in the wild than mismanagement does although, very little attempt to verify litter survival has occurred in the program other than a year end count of collared wolves. Pups don't collar themselves therefore are seldom counted.

The following is a clearer explanation of what actually happened to the wolves the CBD are trying to portray as victims. Almost every one was a legitimate and legal removal. The Hon-Dah pups were the only exception and we agree the person who housed them with another wolf pack was responsible for their brutal but totally foreseeable end. It is very important that we continually hold the CBD's feet to the fire and remember what happened to these animals and why. If anyone sees a story about this press release in the media in upcoming days please feel free to clarify the misinformation put forth by the CBD.

thanks Wolf ID / Pack Death Date Cause or Circumstances of Death

m623 / Pipestem 8/24/1999 CBD says capture stress-induced disease WE SAY (Canine Parvovirus a virus that commonly kills entire litters of canine pups, not caused by stress.) f625 / Pipestem 8/30/1999 CBD says capture stress-induced disease WE SAY (Canine Parvovirus) m626 / Pipestem 8/30/1999 CBD says capture stress-induced disease WE SAY (Canine Parvovirus) M580 / Wildcat 11/9/2001 hyperthermia from helicopter pursuit WE SAY (wolf left newly released mate with newborn litter and strayed from recovery area. This caused the death of most litter and blind survivor rescued by FWS personnel. Completely abnormal behavior of inbred wolves, continues to contribute to mortality.)

AF592 / Sycamore 5/27/2003 CBD says: shot by Fish and Wildlife Service WE SAY: (With it's mate, this wolf harassed and terrorized a human child and killed multiple calves agency personnel merely managed appropriately as the ten J rule and ESA allow.) ??827 / Francisco 6/10/2003 CBD says: stress from construction activities near pen WE SAY: (possibly canine parvovirus and Cannibalism by parents. FWS won't say_ ??828 / Francisco 6/10/2003 CBD says: stress from construction activities near pen WE SAY: (possibly canine parvovirus and Cannibalism by parents. FWS won't say_

??829 / Francisco 6/10/2003 CBD says: stress from construction activities near pen WE SAY: (possibly canine parvovirus and Cannibalism by parents. FWS won't say_ ??830 / Francisco 6/10/2003 CBD says: stress from construction activities near pen WE SAY: (possibly canine parvovirus and Cannibalism by parents. FWS won't say_ ??831 / Francisco 6/10/2003 CBD says: stress from construction activities near pen WE SAY: (possibly canine parvovirus and Cannibalism by parents. FWS won't say_

AM574 / Saddle 7/11/2004 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY (multiple uncontrolled livestock depredation) as 10J rule allows and ESA authorizes. AM729 / Ring 6/26/2005 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY (multiple uncontrolled livestock depredation) lethally controlled as 10J rule allows and ESA authorizes for massive multiple uncontrollable livestock depredation dozens of head killed prior to lethal control) AF511 / Francisco 7/21/2005 CBD says: capture myopathy WE SAY: (possibly but 3.5 after her third capture indicates age and physical condition when captured played a roll. Removal was as 10J rule allows and ESA authorizes for massive multiple uncontrollable livestock depredation dozens of head killed prior to lethal control in same area as Ring pack (AF 511's daughter was Ring AF so it was all in the family) m1018 / Hon-Dah 4/26/2006

CBD says: capture myopathy WE SAY: (possibly starvation related stress) f1020 / Hon-Dah 5/20/2006 CBD says: captured pup placed with & killed by unrelated wolf WE SAY: (agree with CBD placement with other wolves was shear idiocy someone should have been fired.) f1021 / Hon-Dah 5/20/2006 CBD says: captured pup placed with & killed by unrelated wolf WE SAY: (agree with CBD placement with other wolves was shear idiocy someone should have been fired.) m1022 / Hon-Dah 5/20/2006 CBD says: captured pup placed with & killed by unrelated wolf WE SAY: (agree with CBD placement with other wolves was shear idiocy someone should have been fired.) m1023 / Hon-Dah 5/20/2006 CBD says: captured pup placed with & killed by unrelated wolf WE SAY: (agree with CBD placement with other wolves was shear idiocy someone should have been fired.)

m1024 / Hon-Dah 5/20/2006 CBD says: captured pup placed with & killed by unrelated wolf WE SAY: (agree with CBD placement with other wolves was shear idiocy someone should have been fired.) m1025 / Hon-Dah 5/20/2006 CBD says: captured pup placed with & killed by unrelated wolf WE SAY: (agree with CBD placement with other wolves was shear idiocy someone should have been fired.) AF1027 / Hon-Dah 5/22/2006 CBD says: capture myopathy WE SAY: (possibly but starvation and large litter may have played a roll.)

AM578 / Hon-Dah 5/24/2006 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (All Hon-dah were removed for massive livestock depredations on White Mtn, Reservation impacting poverty stricken indegenous people's unduly, possibly due to starvation.) M864 / lone wolf 5/28/2006 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (multiple uncontrolled livestock depredation uncompensated, lethal control took place as per 10 J rule and ESA)

AM993 / Nantac 6/18/2006 CBD says shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (both wolves were killing a cow calf pair a day, agency personnel could not stop them, both wolves were in proximity of home with children and were coming to home and behaving aggressively. Lethal control took place through 10J rule and ESA requirements.) AF873 / Nantac 7/6/2006 CBD says shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (both wolves were killing a cow calf pair a day, agency personnel could not stop them, both wolves were in proximity of home with children and were coming to home and behaving aggressively. Lethal control took place through 10J rule and ESA requirements.)

M859 / lone wolf 11/22/2006 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (multiple livestock depredations occurred, were tied to this animal. Lethal control took place through 10J rule and ESA requirements.) AM796 / San Mateo 2/20/2007 shot by USDA Wildlife Services (multiple livestock depredation confirmed, including attacks on horses. Lethal control took place through 10J rule and ESA requirements.) ) m1007 / Saddle 3/16/2007 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (multiple livestock depredation occurred were tied to this animal. Lethal control took place through 10J rule and ESA requirements.) )

AF924 / Durango 7/5/2007 CBD says: shot by USDA Wildlife Services WE SAY: (final livestock depredation occurred was tied to this and it's mate, both wolves 23 times at residence where child lived and was terrorized by wolf presence.)

And not last and certainly not least, apparently, the Center for Biological Diversity doesn't want to discuss Aspen pack stresses, and mortalities much less, depredations from November 2006 to December 2007 either. They don't want to discuss with media the stalking of an 8 year old human child the attack of her dog that defended her. The killing of numerous dogs at family homes. Then finally a full grown horse belonging to the stalking victim. They don't seem to care that the Alpha male was killed by another wolf, the pack was moved by the new male, much to the relief of the parents and child impacted by these animals.

The newly formed pack lost two to three members, and those that were left promptly began killing yearling cattle to feed a new litter, a tally of about 16 head until they were removed in Dec of 07. Only removed because the rancher involved was faced with no choice but to legally shoot them for the uncontrolled destruction of livestock that was occuring primarily on private land. Since that last major spree depredation, there have been dozens of livestock killed and maimed by other wolves but these and other organizations refuse to allow management authorized by the 10J rule and the ESA. Worse, now the agencies are caving into their whims.

[wyocarp]

Today's article on wolves and their interaction with other animals.

Idaho Fish and Game biologists have established that wolves are the primary cause of death of radio-collared cow elk in the Lolo hunting zone, where cow elk numbers are projected to be shrinking by 13 percent a year.

[cassandrasdaddy]

http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=8689

Wolves well fed at Yellowstone, but elk population's safe

By Ryan Smith, ExpressNews Staff
Wolves attack an elk in Yellowstone National Park.

Wolves attack an elk in Yellowstone National Park.

Print story | Email story

August 30, 2007 - Edmonton - If Mark Boyce could converse with elk, he might give them a word of advice: avoid open, flat, snowy areas near rivers and roads.

A biological scientist at the University of Alberta, Boyce analyzed 774 wolf-elk kill sites and concluded that spatial patterns of predation between wolves and elk are more strongly influenced by landscape features than by wolf distribution.

"We found that even though wolf and elk populations overlapped in many areas of our study, the kill sites did not correlate with the areas of overlap as much as they were consistent with certain landscape features, such as proximity to roads," Boyce said.

The research results were published recently in the academic journal Ecology Letters.

Boyce and his colleagues studied the wolf-elk interactions over a period of 10 consecutive winters in a northern range of the Yellowstone National Park in the U.S.

The area has been of special interest to researchers since 1995, when 14 wolves from the Canadian Rockies were introduced to the park. Wolves had been extirpated from Yellowstone in the 1930s, and some people speculated the park's elk population would be doomed with the re-introduced wolves. However, while the number of wolves on Yellowstone's northern range has since grown to 84, the number of elk has not declined appreciably.

"We've found that the availability of refuge areas for elk, and their ease of accessing them, should buffer the elk population in the park from extreme levels of predation," Boyce said.

Boyce added that wolves are inefficient predators, with low rates of hunting success, usually around 20 per cent, due in part to the large size and defensive capabilities of elk, their main prey. Elk in their prime are largely invulnerable to predation from wolves, which are highly selective and target the young, old or weak.

"Our findings suggest that landscape features may often 'tip the balance' in predator-prey outcomes, thus influencing post-encounter outcomes," Boyce said.

Boyce and colleagues noted that "browse communities" - foraging areas in open, flat landscape near roads or rivers (which can cut off escape routes) - offer the greatest risk of wolf predation for elk. Also, deep snowy areas, much harder for elk to move through, are also dangerous.

The great challenge for the elk, however, is that the risky foraging areas provide sustenance during the critical winter months, when the elk experience shrinking fat reserves.

"Our study makes clear that elk in winter face a clear trade-off between forage quality and predation risk. How elk perceive and manage the trade-off between food and safety will ultimately determine if they will survive," Boyce said.

[cassandrasdaddy]

http://biology.kenyon.edu/stures/compsbergdahl/trophic.html

[Zangetsu]

Wolves like any dog or cat like to play with their food and have favorite parts to eat.

...Except that dogs don't play with their food. Cats do though..in fact, cats are one of the only other animals besides humans that hunt for fun/sport. Dogs, are not. Every time I've ever seen one of my dogs kill (birds, rabbits, etc) the deed is done is seconds, and if I'm not fast whatever they caught will be eaten in seconds as well. With my cats, they'll play with what they catch for 5-30 minutes before killing it, each and every time. I have no problem with your apparent hatred for wolves...just make sure you have your facts right if you choose to do so.

Just a random question...has anyone ever seen a dog toy with an animal it intends to kill/eat? For that matter, has anyone ever seen a dog kill for fun?

[Harve Curry]

Domestic dogs running in packs chasing livestock (horses, cattle goats sheep etc.) They have a blast heeling and heading them, and contagious behaviour for other dogs.

[IdahoLT1]

my great grand father shot and killed one of the of the neighbors 2 dingo's. They would chase his horses, and he got tired of scaring them off with them coming back. So he called the neighbor and notified them/warned them he would shoot them if he saw them on his property chasing his horses. About 5 days later, saw them again and shot and killed the female. He dragged it over to the neighbors front step, shotgun in hand. He knocked on the door and when they answered he said "heres your dog. I told you what was going to happen. If you wouldnt take care of it, i would." and he left it at that. Never saw male Dingo after that.

[Zangetsu]

Domestic dogs running in packs chasing livestock (horses, cattle goats sheep etc.) They have a blast heeling and heading them, and contagious behaviour for other dogs.

They would chase his horses, and he got tired of scaring them off with them coming back.

I missed the part where they attacked, maimed, or killed the livestock for fun. Not saying it doesn't happen, just trying to make a point that that type of behavior is not the norm for canines, domesticated or otherwise. Sure, there are going to be some animals with behavioral issues, but that's the animal's issue, and should not be seen as reflective the whole species, which by and large, doesn't attack, maim, or kill something unprovoked unless it plans on eating it at some point.

[IdahoLT1]

Dingo's are well known for chasing an animal till it dies. My great grnadpa didnt lose any horses but his son(my grand uncle) had one of his horses killed a similar way in Missouri. The horse was chased by dogs until it died and was left, bite wounds on the hind legs but nothing was consumed off of it.

[Zangetsu]

Dingo's are well known for chasing an animal till it dies. My great grnadpa didnt lose any horses but his son(my grand uncle) had one of his horses killed a similar way in Missouri. The horse was chased by dogs until it died and was left, bite wounds on the hind legs but nothing was consumed off of it.

First, when you say Dingo, do you mean the wild animal from Australia?

Second, there's a difference between chasing something and having it die as a consequence of that and playing with something until you kill it for fun. The dogs weren't hunting the horse, they weren't thinking of it as a prey animal, they just saw something interesting and were having fun. If the horse stopped running, the dogs would have lost interest and that would have been that. When a cat sees a mouse, it'll bat it around and maul it as long as it's moving, and when it stops/becomes incapable of running and the cat gets bored, assuming it's still alive, the cat will either kill it or leave it so mangled that it might as well have finished it off. Eating it is a secondary concern. The cat was in hunter mindset from the start, and saw the mouse as prey, even if it didn't realize that it wasn't hungry until after the fact. The dogs just saw something they thought was fun and interesting. It's a subtle but very important difference...the cat's intention was to kill, the dog's was not..the animal just happened to die as an unfortunate consequence.

It's the same subtle distinction that one has to make when looking at a self defense shooting; was the shooter's intention to kill, or was the shooter's intention to stop the attacker? The feline intends to kill, or at the very least, to harm. The dogs just saw something fun; they never made the switch into hunter/prey mentality. The horse might as well have been a tennis ball.

[d2wing]

We've always had wolves here in Mn. They are pretty shy, it's rare to see them in the wild. My grandfather was threatened by a pack but managed to hold them off and get home. I only know of one person actually attacked and injured by a wolf. They do thin out the deer and moose in a tough winter.
In some areas the deer numbers are way down and moose have disappeared altogether. In some areas they are hard on livestock too.
I can only recall seeing one in the wild. I've been told they take turns chasing deer in big circles. It's not unusual to hear them howl at night camping up "Nort".
As far as I am concerned they are difficult to control and should not be protected. I don't want to share a place on the food chain and the wolves really hurt some livestock owners. They can really raise havoc with a flock of turkeys or sheep, they do kill for fun.

[MT GUNNY]

Quote:
I'm all for reintroducing wolves and thus restoring our full indigenous species spectrum to the North American eco-system, PROVIDED THAT there are reasonable laws allowing culling by humans; i.e. (1) that a rancher or other person can shoot them without being charged with anything, if they are attacking livestock or people, (2) that each state's wildlife department has the right to regulate their numbers as they see fit, by establishing hunting criterion: season dates, numbers killed, etc.

Absolutely Agreed +2

[ArmedBear]

I missed the part where they attacked, maimed, or killed the livestock for fun. Not saying it doesn't happen, just trying to make a point that that type of behavior is not the norm for canines, domesticated or otherwise.

That's because it's a trait that can be bred in or out of a line.

Google "sharpness" and "drathaar" or "German wirehair" etc.

A dog bred for "sharpness" may be a soft-mouthed bird dog, but it will chase and kill animals (i.e. cats) for fun.

Beware of VHD's with German bloodlines! They sound cool, but the dogs have some issues that aren't compatible with American expectations, at least in populated areas.:)

A guy I talked to the other day had to put down his German Wirehair for that reason, or face fines and lawsuits from neighbors. I think that's plain wrong -- unless there's a rodent problem, keep your damn cat INSIDE where it doesn't kill birds -- cat nuts don't agree and tend not to acknowledge their animals' impact on the local ecosystem. Fish and Game sides with me, but Animal Control sides with cat owners, apparently.

Anyway... Canines can and will kill for fun. I love my dogs like their my children, but I don't delude myself about what they are.

[Harve Curry]

Wolf attack a tragic, cautionary tale
Jerry George
http://www.aws.vcn.com/wolf_attacks_on_humans.html
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Bad news.

A story reached my desk yesterday about the death of Kenton Carnegie, 22, a geology student. Carnegie was attacked and killed by wolves while hiking in remote Northern Saskatchewan. Carnegie is the first human known to have been killed by healthy, wild wolves in North America.

The incident took place in early November, but yesterday's story was the first I'd heard of the unfortunate tragedy.

Those of us who stand a few feet back from the impassioned wolf watchers have wondered when a person would fall victim to wolves. Wolves are wild animals. They have a long track record of killing people in Europe and elsewhere, about which I will offer a bit of perspective in a moment. But, before this, death by wolf was unknown in North America.

I have been able to find 27 recorded wolf attacks on humans in North America. Some have resulted in serious injury, but all of the people attacked by wolves here have survived.

Now, before everyone runs off in a panic nattering that we have to stop wolf reintroductions, let's put Carnegie's untimely death in perspective. Canadian wildlife officials have launched a thorough investigation and have already issued some preliminary findings.

The officials noted that the local people had fed the wolves -- both intentionally and unintentionally -- in the area where Carnegie was attacked. The wolves had grown used to being around people and seeing them as a source of food. The term wildlife managers use for this is habituation. Contrary to popular belief, habituated wildlife is always more dangerous to humans than wildlife that is naturally wary of humans.

I am not the best person to make this point because I have done it myself, but feeding wildlife, except in situations authorized by local wildlife officials, is dumb, harms the animals, and may harm you. The best example is deer. Deer are everywhere because we feed them our garden plants and even put out food for them. Where there are deer, there are mountain lions. Enough said.

Humans have a very weird news gene that causes us to panic over unlikely events, such as great white shark attacks, a far bigger risk than wolf attacks even if you're not a surfer, and ignore or trivialize more immediate dangers such as domestic dogs.

I see this all the time in Yellowstone. Visitors go on and on about bear attacks (12 people injured since 1978) and pay no attention to the bison (56 people attacked in the same time frame). Or how about this statistic: 29,000 people injured and 200 killed each year in the United States in automobile collisions with deer.

An exhaustive Norwegian study surveyed all wolf attacks throughout the world for the last several hundred years. Wolf attacks on humans have been growing in frequency. The Norwegians wanted to assess the threat.

The most prevalent cause of wolf attacks? Rabies. During the period when wolf attacks were more common in Europe, the majority were made by rabid wolves. At the same historical time, wolves and larger domestic dogs interbred. Some of the "killing sprees" by wolves documented in France (one rabid wolf/dog cross bit more than 30 people) were by domestic dog/wolf crosses.

Just thinking about a rabid wolf is scary, but there is almost no chance of rabies getting into a wolf population today. Because of inoculation, Europe is almost rabies-free and so is North America. Rabid wolves are unlikely in the extreme.

After rabies, habituation -- wolves losing their natural wariness of humans -- leads to the most conflict between wolves and man. Then comes provocation, what I call stupid human tricks, such as crawling into a wolf den to see the pups. Stupidity happens. It seems to be linked to that news gene.

The least frequent cause of wolf attacks is predation, but these instances have become the stuff of folktales for one very good reason. In those rare instances when wolves decide to feed on people, they attack children. If you think about wolf feeding habits, this sad fact is no surprise. Wolves and other predators feed on calves, the young, of their normal prey species. Also, children often tended the family herds and still do in places such as India, where at least 273 children have been killed by wolves.

Carnegie's death is unfortunate. A life cut short always seems a waste. That it came by wolf is cautionary, but no more. It is still far safer to trek the wilds than cross a street.

Freelance writer "Digger'' Jerry George and his wife are back in Yellowstone National Park for the winter. E-mail him at home@sfchronicle.com.

[Harve Curry]

WOLF ATTACKS ON HUMANS
By T. R. Mader, Research Division

It has been widely discussed whether a healthy wild wolf has ever attacked a human on this continent. In fact, many say such attacks have never occurred in North America.

History states otherwise. Although attacks on humans are uncommon, they have occurred on this continent, both in the early years of settlement and more recently. Here is one report:

“NEW ROCKFORD, DAK, March 7 - The news has just reached here that a father and son, living several miles northeast of this city, were destroyed by wolves yesterday. The two unfortunate men started to a haystack some ten rods from the house to shovel a path around the stack when they were surrounded by wolves and literally eaten alive. The horror-stricken mother was standing at the window with a babe in her arms, a spectator to the terrible death of her husband and son, but was unable to aid them. After they had devoured every flesh from the bones of the men, the denizens of the forest attacked the house, but retired to the hills in a short time. Investigation found nothing but the bones of the husband and son. The family name was Olson. Wolves are more numerous and dangerous now than ever before known in North Dakota." (Saint Paul Daily Globe, March 8, 1888)

Here an account is reported which included an eyewitness and the family name. Some have reasoned the wolves were rabid. That is unlikely as these animals were functioning as a pack. A rabid wolf is a loner. Our research has never found a single historical account of packs of rabid wolves on this continent. Individual animals are the norm. Further, accounts of rabid (hydrophobic) animals were common in that day and were reported as such.

The winters of 1886-1888 were very harsh. Many western ranchers went broke during these years. The harsh winter could have been a factor in the attack.

Noted naturalists documented wolf attacks on humans. John James Audubon, of whom the Audubon Society is named, reported an attack involving 2 Negroes. He records that the men were traveling through a part of Kentucky near the Ohio border in winter. Due to the wild animals in the area the men carried axes on their shoulders as a precaution. While traveling through a heavily forested area, they were attacked by a pack of wolves. Using their axes, they attempted to fight off the wolves. Both men were knocked to the ground and severely wounded. One man was killed. The other dropped his axe and escaped up a tree. There he spent the night. The next morning the man climbed down from the tree. The bones of his friend lay scattered on the snow. Three wolves lay dead. He gathered up the axes and returned home with the news of the event. This incident occurred about 1830. (Audubon, J.J., and Bachman, J.; The Quadrupeds of North America, 3 volumes. New York, 1851 - 1854)

George Bird Grinnell investigated several reported wolf attacks on humans. He dismissed many reports for lack of evidence. Grinnell did verify one attack.

This occurrence was in northwestern Colorado. An eighteen-year-old girl went out at dusk to bring in some milk cows. She saw a gray wolf on a hill as she went out for the cows. She shouted at the wolf to scare it away and it did not move. She then threw a stone at it to frighten it away. The animal snarled at her shouting and attacked her when she threw the stone at it. The wolf grabbed the girl by the shoulder, threw her to the ground and bit her severely on the arms and legs. She screamed and her brother, who was nearby and armed with a gun, responded to the scene of the attack and killed the wolf. The wolf was a healthy young animal, barely full grown. Grinnell met this girl and examined her. She carried several scars from the attack. This attack occurred in summer about 1881. (Grinnell, G.B.; Trail and Campfire - Wolves and Wolf Nature, New York, 1897)

In 1942, Michael Dusiak, section foreman for the Canadian Pacific Railway, was attacked by a wolf while patrolling a section of track on a speeder (small 4-wheeled open railroad car). Dusiak relates, "It happened so fast and as it was still very dark, I thought an engine had hit me first. After getting up from out of the snow very quickly, I saw the wolf which was about fifty feet away from me and it was coming towards me, I grabbed the two axes (tools on the speeder), one in each hand and hit the wolf as he jumped at me right in the belly and in doing so lost one axe. Then the wolf started to circle me and got so close to me at times that I hit him with the head of the axe and it was only the wielding of the axe that kept him from me. All this time he was growling and gnashing his teeth. Then he would stop circling me and jump at me and I would hit him with the head of the axe. This happened five times and he kept edging me closer to the woods which was about 70 feet away. We fought this way for about fifteen minutes and I fought to stay out in the open close to the track. I hit him quite often as he came at me very fast and quick and I was trying to hit him a solid blow in the head for I knew if once he got me down it would be my finish. Then in the course of the fight he got me over onto the north side of the track and we fought there for about another ten minutes. Then a west bound train came along travelling about thirty miles an hour and stopped about half a train length west of us and backed up to where we were fighting. The engineer, fireman and brakeman came off the engine armed with picks and other tools, and killed the wolf."

It should be noted that this wolf was skinned and inspected by an Investigator Crichton, a Conservation Officer. His assessment was that the animal was a young healthy wolf in good condition although it appeared lean. ("A Record of Timber Wolf Attacking a Man," JOURNAL OF MAMMOLOGY, Vol. 28, No. 3, August 1947)

Common Man Institute, in cooperation with Abundant Wildlife Society of North America, has done extensive research on wolves and their history for several years. We have gathered evidence on wolf attacks which occurred in North America.

A forester employed by the Province of British Colombia was checking some timber for possible harvest in the 1980s. He was met by a small pack of three wolves. The forester yelled at the wolves to frighten them away. Instead, the wolves came towards him in a threatening manner and he was forced to retreat and climb a nearby tree for safety. The wolves remained at the base of the tree. The forester had a portable radio, but was unable to contact his base, due to distance, until evening. When the call for help came in, two Conservation Officers with the Ministry of Environment were flown to the area by floatplane to rescue the treed forester.


When the Conservation Officers arrived, the forester was still in the tree and one wolf, the apparent leader of the pack, was still at the base of the tree. The officers, armed with shotguns, shot at the wolf and missed. The wolf ran for cover and then started circling and howling near the two officers. After a couple missed shots, the wolf was finally shot and killed.

The wolf tested negative for rabies. It appeared healthy in every respect, but was very lean. The Conservation Officers felt the attack was caused by hunger. (Taped Interviews and a photo of the wolf on file at Abundant Wildlife Society of North America.)

This is but one example from British Colombia. Wolves overran Vancouver Island in the 1980s. Attacks became so common that articles were published in Canadian magazines documenting such attacks. (Copies available upon request.)

Wolf Attacks on humans have occurred in national parks, too. In August 1987, a sixteen-year-old girl was bitten by a wild wolf in Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario. The girl was camping in the park with a youth group and shined a flashlight at the wolf. The wolf reacted to the light by biting the girl on the arm. That bite was not hard and due to the thick sweater and sweatshirt the girl was wearing, she sustained two scratch marks on her arm. The wolf was shot by Natural Resources personnel and tested negative for rabies. (Interview with Ron Tozer, Park Naturalist for Algonquin Provincial Park, 7/25/88.)

Well-known wolf biologist Dr. David Mech took issue with this attack stating it couldn't really be considered an authentic attack since the girl wasn't injured more severely. It was exactly nine years when such an attack would take place.

Algonquin Provincial Park is one of several areas where people are encouraged to "howl" at the wolves in hopes of a response from the wild wolves in the area. In August, 1996, the Delventhal family of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were spending a nine-day family vacation in Algonquin and joined a group of Scouts in "howling" at the wolves. They were answered by the howl of a solitary wolf.

That night the Delventhals decided to sleep out under the stars. Young Zachariah was dreaming when he suddenly felt excruciating pain in his face. A lone wolf had bit him in the face and was dragging him from his sleeping bag. Zach screamed and Tracy, Zach's Mother, raced to his side and picked him up, saturating her thermal shirt with blood from Zach's wounds.

The wolf stood menacingly less than a yard away. Tracy yelled at her husband, Thom, who leapt from his sleeping bag and charged the wolf. The wolf retreated and then charged at Tracy and Zach. The charges were repeated. Finally the wolf left. Thom turned a flashlight on 11-year-old Zach and gasped "Oh, my God!" "The boy's face had been ripped open. His nose was crushed. Parts of his mouth and right cheek were torn and dangling. Blood gushed from puncture wounds below his eyes, and the lower part of his right ear was missing." Zach was taken to a hospital in Toronto where a plastic surgeon performed four hours of reconstructive surgery. Zach received more than 80 stitches in his face.

Canadian officials baited the Delventhals' campsite and captured and destroyed a 60-lb wild male wolf. No further attacks have occurred since. (Cook, Kathy; "Night of the Wolf" READER'S DIGEST, July 1997, pp. 114-119.)

Humans have been attacked by wolves in Alaska. The late David Tobuk carried scars on his face from a wolf attack on him as a small child. The incident occurred around the turn of the century in interior Alaska. David was playing in his village near a river. An old wolf came into the village and bit David in the face and started to carry him off. Other Eskimos saw the wolf dragging the child off and started yelling and screaming. The wolf dropped the child and was shot by an old Eskimo trapper who had a gun. (Interview with Frank Tobuk, brother, Bettles, Alaska, December 1988.)

Paul Tritt, an Athabascan Indian, was attacked by a lone wolf while working a trap line. Paul was setting a snare, looked up and saw a wolf lunging at him. He threw his arm up in front of his face and it was bitten severely by the wolf. A struggle ensued. Tritt was able to get to his sled, grab a gun and kill the wolf. Nathaniel Frank, a companion, helped Tritt wash the wound with warm water. Frank took Tritt, via dog sled, to Fort Yukon to see a doctor. The arm healed, but Tritt never regained full use of it. Several years later, the arm developed problems and had to be amputated. (Interview with Paul Tritt, Venetie, Alaska, November, 1988)


Two wolf attacks on humans occurred in 2000.

Icy Bay, Alaska - Six-year-old John Stenglein and a nine-year-old friend were playing outside his family's trailer at a logging camp when a wild wolf came out of the woods towards the boys. The boys ran and the wolf attacked young Stenglein from the back, biting him on the back and buttocks. Adults, hearing the boy's screams, came and chased the wolf away. The wolf returned a few moments later and was shot. According to Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) officials, the wolf was a healthy wild wolf that apparently attacked without provocation. The boy was flown to Yakutat and recieved stitches there for his wounds. Later, however, the bites became infected and the boy had to be hospitalized. (Reports and Interviews on file and available upon request.)

Vargas Island, British Colombia - University student, Scott Langevin, 23, was on a kayak trip with friends. They camped out on a beach and, about 1 AM, Langevin awoke with something pulling on his sleeping bag. He looked out and came face to face with a wild wolf. Langevin yelled at the wolf and it attacked, biting him on the hand. Langevin attempted to force the wolf toward a nearby campfire, but as he turned, the wolf jumped on his back and started biting him on the back of his head. Friends, hearing his yells, came to his aid and scared the wolf away. Fifty (50) stitches were required to close the wound on Langevin's head. British Colombia Ministry of Enviroment officials speculate the reason for the attack was due to the wolves occasionally being fed by humans although there was no evidence that Langevin or any of his party fed these animals. (Reports and Interviews on file and available upon request.)


This is but a brief summary of a few verifiable accounts of attacks on humans by healthy wild wolves in North American History.


Biologists tell us that the wolves of Asia and North America are one and the same species. Wolf attacks are common in many parts of Asia.

[Harve Curry]

Biologists tell us that the wolves of Asia and North America are one and the same species. Wolf attacks are common in many parts of Asia.


Con't:
The government of India reported more than 100 deaths attributable to wolves in one year during the eighties. (Associated Press, 1985) This author recalls a news report in 1990 in which Iran reported deaths from attacks by wolves.

Rashid Jamsheed, a U.S. trained biologist, was the game director for Iran. He wrote a book entitled "Big Game Animals of Iran (Persia)." In it he made several references to wolf attacks on humans. Jamsheed says that for a millennia people have reported wolves attacking and killing humans. In winter, when starving wolves grow bold, they have been known to enter towns and kill people in daylight on the streets. Apparently, in Iran, there are many cases of wolves running off with small children. There is also a story of a mounted and armed policeman (gendarme) being followed by 3 wolves. In time he had to get off his horse to attend to nature’s call, leaving his rifle in the scabbard. A later reconstruction at the scene of the gnawed bones and wolf tracks indicated that the horse had bolted and left the man defenseless, whereupon he was killed and eaten.

A Russian Linguist, Will Graves, provided our organization with reports of wolves killing Russian people in many areas of that country. Reports indicate some of the wolves were diseased while others appeared healthy. (Reports on file and available upon request.)

Reports have also come from rural China. The official Zinhua News Agency reported that a peasant woman, Wu Jing, snatched her two daughters from the jaws of a wolf and wrestled with the animal until rescuers arrived. Wu slashed at the wolf with a sickle and it dropped one daughter, but grabbed her sister. It was then Wu wrestled with the animal until herdsmen came and drove the beast away. This incident occurred near Shenyang City, about 380 miles northeast of Beijing. (Chronicle Features, 1992)

The question arises: "Why so many attacks in Asia and so few in North America?"

Two factors must be considered:

1. The Philosophy of Conservation - Our forefathers always believed that they had the right and obligation to protect their livelihoods. Considerable distance was necessary between man and wolf for the wolf to survive.

2. Firearms - Inexpensive, efficient weapons gave man the upper hand in the protection of his livelihood and for the taking of wolves.

Milton P. Skinner in his book, “The Yellowstone Nature Book” (published 1924) wrote, "Most of the stories we hear of the ferocity of these animals... come from Europe. There, they are dangerous because they do not fear man, since they are seldom hunted except by the lords of the manor. In America, the wolves are the same kind, but they have found to their bitter cost that practically every man and boy carries a rifle..."

Skinner was correct. The areas of Asia where wolf attacks occur on humans are the same areas where the people have no firearms or other effective means of predator control.


But ... "Biologists claim there are no documented cases of healthy wild wolves attacking humans."

What they really mean is there are no "documented" cases by their criteria which excludes historical accounts. Here's an example.

Rabid wolves were a frightening experience in the early years due to their size and the seriousness of being bit, especially before a vaccine was developed. The bitten subject usually died a slow, miserable death. There are numerous accounts of rabid wolves and their activities. Early Army forts have medical records of rabid wolves coming into the posts and biting several people before being killed. Most of the people bitten died slow, horrible deaths. Additionally, early historical writings relate personal accounts. This author recalls one historical account telling of a man being tied to a tree and left to die because of his violent behavior with rabies after being bitten by a wolf. Such deaths left profound impressions on eyewitnesses of those events.

Dr. David Mech, USFWS wolf biologist, states there are no "documented" cases of rabid wolves below the fifty seventh latitude north (near Whitehorse, Yukon Territory). When asked what "documented" meant, he stated, "The head of the wolf must be removed, sent to a lab for testing and found to be rabid."


Those requirements for documentation negate all historical records!
As with rabid wolves, the biologist can say, "There are no `documented' cases of wild healthy wolves attacking humans." In order to be "documented" these unreasonable criteria must be met:

1. The wolf has to be killed, examined and found to be healthy.

2. It must be proven that the wolf was never kept in captivity in its entire life.

3. There must be eyewitnesses to the attack.

4. The person must die from their wounds (bites are generally not considered attacks according to the biologists).


That is a "documented" attack.

Such criteria make it very difficult to document any historical account of a wolf attack on a human!



Biologists assume when a wolf attacks a human, that there must be something wrong with the wolf. It's either been in captivity or it's sick or whatever. They don't examine the evidence in an unbiased manner or use historical tests.



Historically, there are four reasons for wolf attacks on humans:



1. Disease such as rabies.



2. Extreme hunger.



3. Familiarity/Disposition - This is an either/or situation. Familiarity is the zoo setting, captive wolves, etc. Disposition is a particularly aggressive wolf which may not fear man as most wolves do.



4. In the heat of the chase and kill - This is where a hiker, trapper or whoever disturbs a fresh chase and kill by wolves. The person walks into the scene only to be attacked by the wolves.



It is our belief that a predator's fear of man is both instinctive and learned behavior. For example, wolves raised as pets or in zoos are well documented to attack and kill humans.



Alyshia Berzyck, of Minnesota, was attacked and killed by a wolf on a chain on June 3, 1989. The wolf tore up her kidney, liver and bit a hole through her aorta. One month later, on July 1, 1989, Peter Lemke, 5, lost 12 inches of his intestine and colon and suffered bites to his stomach, neck, legs, arms and back in another wolf attack in Kenyon, Minnesota. (Reports on file and available upon request.)



Zoos carry abundant records of wolf attacks on people, particularly children. The child climbs the enclosure fence to pet the "dog" and is attacked.



Zoos and domestic settings are unnatural in that they place man and wolf in close proximity and they become accustomed to each other. Consequently attacks occur.



Today predator control is very restricted in scope, and as a result, attacks on humans by predators are becoming more common. In recent years, healthy coyotes in Yellowstone Park have attacked humans. Similar attacks have occurred in the National Parks of Canada.



On January 14, 1991, a healthy mountain lion attacked and killed an eighteen-year-old high school senior, Scott Lancaster, in Idaho Springs, Colorado. The boy was jogging on a jogging path within the city limits of the town when the lion attacked and killed him. (Report on file at Abundant Wildlife Society of North America)



Copyright 1995, 2000, T. R. Mader, Research Division

Permission granted to disseminate and/or reprint if credit is given to the source.







OTHER REPORTED WOLF ATTACKS IN THE WILD



1. Comox Valley, British Colombia – 1986 - While driving a tractor, Jakob Knopp was followed by three wolves to his barn. They didn't leave, but kept snarling and showing their teeth. Knopp ran to his barn, retreived a rifle and had to shoot two of the three wolves before the third left the area.



2. George Williams, a retired sailor heard a commotion in his chicken coup one night. Thinking it was raccoons he took his single shot 22 rifle and headed for the coup. He rounded his fishing boat and trailer when a wolf leaped at him. He instinctively reacted with a snap shot with the rifle and dropped the wolf. A second wolf came at him before he could reload and George swung the rifle and struck the wolf across the head, stunning it. George retreated to the house until morning and found the wolf he had shot, the other was gone.



3. Clarence Lewis was picking berries on a logging road about a mile from Knopp's farm when he faced four wolves. Lewis yelled at them, two left and the other two advanced towards him. He took a branch and took a couple of threatening steps at them. They went into the brush and stayed close to him. Lewis faced the wolves and walked backward for two miles until he reached his car.



4. Don Hamilton, Conservation Officer at Nanaimo went to investigate a livestock killing by wolves. Wolves had killed a number of sheep in a pasture and Don went out to examine the kills. He came upon the scene and saw a large gray wolf feeding on one of the sheep. The wolf looked at him, growled and started running towards him at full speed. The wolf was over 100 yards away and never broke stride as it approached Don. At approximately 15 feet, Don shot the wolf to stop its attack. Don, who has many years experience with wolves, stated that he was convinced that the wolf was going to attack him because of its growling, snarling and aggressive behavior.



5. In 1947, a man was hunting cougar on Vancouver Island and was attacked by a pack of seven wolves. The man backed against a tree and shot the leader of the pack. The pack instantly tore the animal to shreds while the hunter made his escape.



6. Clarence Lindley was reportedly attacked by a 125-pound timber wolf. The incident occurred in early November, 1992 on the Figure 4 Ranch in Dunn County, North Dakota. Lindley was hunting horseback when the wolf attacked Lindley's horse causing it to jump and fall. Lindley was able to grab his saddle gun, a lever action Winchester 94, as the horse fell. The horse recovered its balance and Lindley found himself face to face with a snarling wolf. "My heart was pounding," said Lindley, "I could see those big teeth. He was less than five feet away... He meant business; he wasn't going to back off." Lindley fired his rifle at point blank range and killed the wolf with a shot to the neck. Lindley left the wolf since he couldn't get his horse close to it. On return to his hunting camp, his hunter friends failed to believe the account. They returned to the scene and skinned the wolf. The pelt was a flawless black and gray pelt measuring seven and a half feet from its feet to its snout. Its bottom teeth measured one and a half inches; top teeth - one and a quarter inches. The North Dakota Game and Fish Department (NDGF) confiscated the hide and head of the wolf and took it to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for determination of its species. Tests revealed that the wolf was non-rabid. The wolf was thought to have come from Canada. (Reports on file and available upon request.)



WOLF ATTACKS ON HUMANS (domestic incidents)



1. In the 1970s, John Harris, a Californian, toured the nation with “tame” wolves to promote public sympathy for preserving wolves. In July, 1975, "Rocky," one of Harris' wolves, attacked a one-year-old girl by biting her in the face. The girl was brought close to the wolf for a picture, an action encouraged by Harris.



2. In Maryland, a man kept a wolf in his basement and this animal turned and savagely bit and clawed his two-year-old son.



3. In New York City, a wolf bit a woman as it approached her.



4. At a zoo in Idaho, a little girl walked up to a cage housing a wolf and reached through the bars to pet the wolf. The wolf bit the arm. The arm had to be amputated.



5. Mr. Edward Rucciuti, former curator of publications for the New York Zoological Society and author of KILLER ANIMALS, personally witnessed a 12-year-old boy savagely attacked in the Bronx Zoo. This boy climbed a high fence in order to pet the wolves. The wolves (male and 2 females) immediately attacked the boy, ripping at the boy's clothing and flesh. The boy instinctively curled up in a ball, protecting his head, chest and abdomen. He then crawled into the moat in front of the exhibit with the wolves chewing his back and legs. Once the boy made it to the water, the wolves ceased their attack. The boy crawled out of the moat and collapsed. Mr. Rucciuti was amazed that the boy was still alive due to the severity of the bites.



6. San Diego Zoo (1971) A 15-year-old boy climbed the fence and tried to take a shortcut across the exhibit. He didn't know there were wolves in the exhibit and tried to run when he saw them. The wolves grabbed him by the leg attempting to drag him off. The boy grabbed a tree and hung on. Two bystanders jumped in the enclosure and attacked the wolves with tree branches. The wolves did not attack the two men, but continued to maul the boy. Dragging the boy and swinging their clubs, the boy was pulled out of the enclosure. The wolves in the enclosure were all young animals and it was thought that if the animals were mature, the boy would have died before being rescued.



7. A few months after the attack on the boy (#6), a man scaled the fence and swung his arms in the exhibit to get the attention of the wolves and got it by being bitten severely on both arms.



8. 1973 - Another boy tried to cross the same compound and was attacked, a security guard shot and killed one of the wolves, and the other fled as the boy was pulled to safety.



9. 1975 - Small zoo in Worcester, Massachusetts, a two-year-old lad was savagely bitten on the leg when it slipped through an enclosure opening. The boy's mother and 2 men could not pull the boy free. The wolves did not stop ripping the boy's leg apart until a railroad tie was thrown in the midst of the wolves.



10. 1978 -- A wolf bit a child in Story, Wyoming. The wolf was penned at a local veterinary clinic for observation. During that time, the wolf escaped its pen and killed a young calf. Wyoming law prohibits the keeping of wild animals as pets, so the animal was shipped to Ohio, where it had come from. The owner of the wolf went to Ohio and brought the wolf back to Wheatland, Wyoming. It was reported the wolf attacked and killed a child in that area shortly thereafter.



11. September, 1981 - A two-year-old boy was mauled to death by an 80-lb, 3 year-old female wolf in Ft. Wayne, Michigan. The boy wandered within the chain length of the wolf.



12. August 2, 1986 (Fergus Falls, Minnesota) - A 17-month-old boy reached and grabbed the fencing which kept his father's pet wolves enclosed. One wolf immediately grabbed the boy's hand and bit it off. The mother was at the scene and received lacerations freeing the child from the wolf.



13. July 1988 (Minnesota Zoo) - A teenage volunteer reached through the wire fence to pet a wolf and was bitten. The wolf was put to sleep and tested for rabies – negative.



14. May 15, 1989 - 2-year-old Timothy Bajinski was bitten by a wolf hybrid in his mother's Staten Island, New York backyard. Mrs. Bajinski has been charged with keeping a wild animal.



15. May 1989 - Lucas Wilken was bitten by two wolf hybrids in Adams County, CO (Denver Area).



16. June 3, 1989 - Three year old Alyshia Berczyk was attacked and killed by a wolf in Forest Lake, Minnesota. The wolf had bitten her severely and had injured her kidneys, liver and bit through her aorta. Alyshia was playing in a backyard when she got too close to the chained wolf that grabbed her dress and pulled her down, attacking her.



17. July 1, 1989 (Kenyon, Minnesota) - Peter Lemke, age 5, attempted to pet a chained wolf and was attacked. He lost 12 inches of his intestine and colon, suffered a tear in his stomach, and bite wounds on his arms, legs, buttocks and neck. While being life-flighted to the hospital, Pete arrested 3 times but was saved by medical personnel. The Lemkes have incurred over $200,000 in hospital bills. Pete has a colostomy bag, but doctors are hopeful they can re-attach his colon and get it to function normally in later surgeries.



18. September 3, 1989 - A wolf and a dog entered a corral belonging to Leona Geppfart of Caldwell, ID and attacked a 6-month-old 400-pound Hereford calf. Geppfart attempted to scare the animals away and they turned on her and she retreated to her house. A short time later, a law enforcement officer arrived and as he approached the corral, the wolf lunged at him. The officer stopped the animal with his shotgun.

NOTE: This list of wolf attacks is by no means exhaustive. They are simply listed to show that attacks have occurred both in the wild and other settings.

About the Author: T. R. Mader is Research Director of Abundant Wildlife Society of North America, an independent research organization. Mader has researched wolf history for more than 15 years and has traveled over 30,000 miles conducting research and interviews on environmental issues.

For more information, contact:
ABUNDANT WILDLIFE SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA
P. O. Box 2
Beresford, SD 57004

Permission granted to disseminate and/or reprint if credit is given to the source

[cassandrasdaddy]

Founded by former cattleman Dick Mader in 1989 in effort to obstruct reintroduction of the endangered grey wolf in Yellowstone National Park. Mader's son, Troy, considers himself the world's leading expert on the wolf, and distributes booklets showing deer, sheep, and cattle supposedly mauled by the grey wolf. Associated with the Wise Use movement and is a member of the Alliance for America.

[cassandrasdaddy]

my husky/lab kills for fun my chickens and i've seen her bring me squirrels and rabbits still quite alive

[cassandrasdaddy]

for what its worth i think a rancher/farmer catches wolves killing his stock should be able to shoot it right there. its the "kill em all folks that need to chill

[Sagetown]

I can remember back when I was young, how the coyotes in our area would raid Dad's cattle herd every winter. Sometime in the early 60's the raids began tapering off. Fish and Game paid out bounties and performed other types of predator control.

[cassandrasdaddy]

http://texnat.tamu.edu/symposia/coyote/p7.htm

long piece but heres the meat

Conclusion

Although the results of these studies appear ambiguous at first glance, differences in methodologies among studies can explain the various outcomes. The Texas studies which involved short-term (< 6 months) coyote removal programs did not note differences in rodent and lagomorph populations. However, those studies which consistently removed coyotes throughout the year began to realize population-level changes after a minimum of 9 months of coyote removal.

Although white-tailed deer and bobwhite quail reproductive success increased with coyote removal, overall population densities for both species remained unchanged. This implies that a compensatory mortality mechanism is involved with these populations and that potential population increases of certain game species due to coyote removal are short-lived. All studies indicated that coyote control caused an immigration of coyotes into the removal areas. Coyote population densities returned to pre-removal levels typically within 3 months after removal efforts ceased.

Therefore, short-term coyote removal programs typically are not sufficient in reducing coyote density and, therefore do not alter ecosystem composition. However, intensive, long-term coyote removal has been successful in reducing coyote populations by over 40%, which has resulted in prey-base increases.

The intended goals of coyote control need to be determined prior to the onset of removal efforts. If the management objective is to reduce livestock losses caused by coyotes, then an intensive, short-term removal program may provide immediate relief of depredation just before and after parturition. However, if the coyote removal is practiced year-round, microherbivore populations may potentially increase; increased competition for forage with livestock may result. Consequently, a reduced stocking rate then may be required to offset competition, which may negate the number of livestock saved from predation.

If the goal is to increase the harvestable surplus of a game species, then it must first be determined that coyote control will increase the numbers of the target species. Next, can the additional animals be supported by the habitat? Finally, will predation as a mortality source be replaced with other mortality factors acting in a compensatory manner? Until these questions can be answered, then coyote removal would not be warranted.
Literature Cited

[Sagetown]

quote by cassandrasdaddy:Next, can the additional animals be supported by the habitat?

That's the problem. What with farmers and ranchers using larger and more Sophisticated implements and tractors, that can cover many, many acres per day, keeping the land clean, or planted in thick fescue, the quail habitat in many areas have all but vanished.

Deer on the otherhand can cope with land improvement as long as they have some cover.

[SHvar]

The student was working at a mine in Canada, the student was videotaped by his friend the day before harassing, swinging a stick at habituated wolves, and laughing at them. They were habituated by improper trash disposal methods and irresponsible miners and students feeding them.
By the way, the reintroduced population of wolves in the northern rockies is the only pure population of wolves in the lower 48 left. Its a proven fact from genetic testing done on those reintroduced, and on those that have been born from those original wolves.
The Great lakes population is polluted by dog genetics, around 40% or more, why, simple, from hunting the experienced alpha males and females this leaves weaker less experienced, less knowledgeable wolves trying to learn on their own to survive, these animals are the wolves that mix with dogs on rare occasion, and hunt livestock instead of their intended wild prey.
Irresponsible livestock husbandry causes a few livestock kills every year with wolves. By researching this subject wolves kill very few livestock animals a year, the majority are from disease, accidents, predation from coyotes not kept in check by wolves, and from mans best friend, the dog running lose, or from coydogs and feral dogs which are decended from herding dogs and farm/ranch dogs.
The subject of wolves and Europe, during the middle ages when reports of wolf attacks in Europe reached its highest point, this time period followed the fall of the Roman empire. During the Roman empire everyone had dogs, livestock protection, herding, guard dogs, pets, working dogs of many breeds. At the fall of Rome these dogs were abandoned to nature all over Europe. These dogs lived wild and took advantage of what they knew were reliable food suppliers, humans and their livestock (dogs approach closer and are 1000 times more confident around humans than any wolf will ever be). Its now a proven fact that what was considered wolves at the time were wolfish dogs running wild around human settlements they probably once lived in.
No wolves are not totally harmless, yes they can be ferocious predators, this is what they have done for over 100,000 years before us.
In the US there has never been one verifiable case of a wolf attacking or killing a human, with the exception of a few rare cases of rabid wolves. In fact biologists capture wolves in leghold traps to collar them, they dont even have to use any sedatives to handle them, because they naturally will submit and lie still when handled properly. But they are wild animals and can kill a human (the weaker animal) with no problem.
Dont listen to rumors, or lies spread to rally support for the cause of killing off a long needed integral part of our countries ecosystem. Like any wild animal, they can be properly managed if done responsibly, so far no responsible plan has been cooked up to manage them properly among the states where they were reintroduced. Alaska does have alot of wolf hunting, but keep in mind that they also have 50-100 times as many wolves as the entire lower 48 states combined. They also have traditional wolf hunting practices that were set down by Inuit elders who have lived alongside wolves peacefully for thousands of years. Maybe we should learn from those who have lived with them the longest.
I support hunting as long as it is done legally, and within a well researched and sound plan that benefits our wildlife, not the beef industry or Butch otter.

[SHvar]

I know all about the extreme high prey drives of primative dog breeds such as huskies. I have a pair of furballs that work as a team.
My pure Siberian husky is the older experienced dominant dog, he is smaller, but stronger, faster, and is all business when it comes to wild animals. Luckily I keep him on a leash or on a heavy cable at all times.
My husky/lab/shepard mix was raised by my husky and us, he is 6 inches taller, heavier by around 10 lbs or so, younger, and he is the pack member that chases and keeps the animal busy while the husky slides in unnoticed for the kill.
By the way, I read an article about what was blamed as a wolf attack on a pet in Illinois, the assumption was made because the footprint was 4.5x3.5 inches. Heres a few reference photos of the size of my husky and his enormous snowshoe footprints (4.25x3.5 inches), yet he is almost half the size and weight of an average male gray wolf.

http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z281/SHvar/Picture322.jpg
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z281/SHvar/Picture318.jpg
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z281/SHvar/Picture102.jpg
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z281/SHvar/Picture101.jpg
But they are not quite the savages they may seem sometimes, not with family.
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z281/SHvar/Picture139.jpg

[IdahoLT1]

The student was working at a mine in Canada, the student was videotaped by his friend the day before harassing, swinging a stick at habituated wolves, and laughing at them. They were habituated by improper trash disposal methods and irresponsible miners and students feeding them.

The student had nothing to due with the previous incident. It was his two friends/co workers. They reported the wolf was agressive and they were trying to fend it off.

Authorities did confirm he was killed by wolves. Witnesses obviously heard wolves when the found the body and there were tracks of 5-6 different wolves. He was missing for 4-5 hours before his friends found his body. A bear consumes 15% of its bodyweight in 24hrs or ~7% in 4-5 hours. So in that time, roughly 21lbs would have been consumed, if a bear had killed him. He was missing an estimated 70-80lbs of his body weight(145lb guy), pointing to a pack of wolves. The scene of the incident also showed a struggle. He had been knocked down and gotten up a few times before succoumbing to his death. Had it been a bear, he would never have been able to get up and he would have had broken bones(none reported in the autopsy).


Irresponsible livestock husbandry causes a few livestock kills every year with wolves. By researching this subject wolves kill very few livestock animals a year, the majority are from disease, accidents, predation from coyotes not kept in check by wolves, and from mans best friend, the dog running lose, or from coydogs and feral dogs which are decended from herding dogs and farm/ranch dogs.

Few? Even pro-wolf sites reported that 237 sheep were killed by wolves last year in Idaho, 240 in '05 and 183 in in '04. Yes most are from disease, more are killed by bears, coyotes and cougars than wolves. But, coyotes are considered non-game species in Idaho, cougars and bear have hunting seasons and all 3 far out number wolves. In these tough economic times, why cause more hardship for rancher, livestock owners and pet owners? Less cattel, sheep, pigs and other livestock harvested also means shoppers pay higher prices for their meat. Heres a quote from a newspaper on livestock losses by wolves:

[Written 8/22/08]: 70 percent increase in statewide livestock losses compared to last year, he said. And in July and August alone, the number of livestock losses has nearly tripled compared to the same time last year. http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005122274


In the US there has never been one verifiable case of a wolf attacking or killing a human, with the exception of a few rare cases of rabid wolves.
There have been attacks on humans inside US territory. I will say that the wolves obviously cant distinguish US territory from Canadian territory, so its easy for you to argue about the attacks on US soil(numerous attacks in Canadian territory, even recently, including the 2 incidents before carnegie was killed). The last attack on US soil was in Iowa in 1910(5 dead wolves found at his campsite with an ampty repeating rifle in the middle next to human remain). remember though that the timberwolf was damn near exterminated in the 40's, so you can say "that was almost 100 years ago". There are numerous documented attacks on humans in the 1800's into the 1900's.

Wolf biologist Mark McNay on January 18, 2007, who at the time, worked for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game reported three years prior, he studied 80 events in Alaska and Canada where wolves closely approached or attacked people, finding 39 cases of aggression by apparently healthy wolves, and 29 cases of fearless behavior by non-aggressive wolves. http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/pubs/techpubs/research_pdfs/techb13p1.pdf



Dont listen to rumors, or lies spread to rally support for the cause of killing off a long needed integral part of our countries ecosystem. Like any wild animal, they can be properly managed if done responsibly, so far no responsible plan has been cooked up to manage them properly among the states where they were reintroduced.
Wrong. Like I said in another thread, Montana and Idaho had great management plans. Idaho wanted to keep atleast 520 wolves which was 5 times the amount the US fish and wildlife originally wanted in Idaho and far more than most hunters/sportman/rancher/livestock owners wanted. http://www.idahostatesman.com/1300/story/586396.html

Alaska does have alot of wolf hunting, but keep in mind that they also have 50-100 times as many wolves as the entire lower 48 states combined. They also have traditional wolf hunting practices that were set down by Inuit elders who have lived alongside wolves peacefully for thousands of years. Maybe we should learn from those who have lived with them the longest.
I support hunting as long as it is done legally, and within a well researched and sound plan that benefits our wildlife, not the beef industry or Butch otter.

So Alaska has between 300,000 and 600,000 wolves? Because there are around 4,000 wolves in the midwest and ~2,000 in the rockies. Thats a crap load of wolves. They might have 3-4 times as many, at most 10x.

the problem with the wolf reintroduction was that they reintroduced the wrong wolf. Some people will say the native timberwolf is the same as the gray wolf, but there is a rule called Bergmans Rule which basically states that animals in the same species will get larger as the latitude of degrees goes up. Meaning local timberwolves(sub species of the gray wolf) are smaller than the gray wolves in Alaska. Look at all the White tail, Mule deer and Elk size records and they are from northern countries/terriories.

This Canadian gray wolf species is also use to hunting Carribou, which are faster and have larger herd numbers than Elk. So they re introduce a larger, non native wolf species thats been used to hunting faster, greater protected by numbers and greater populated animals for thousands of years. Elk populations have decreased by 50% in Yellowstone since the mid 90's. Read this report for some interesting facts http://www.yellowstonepark.com/MoreToKnow/ShowNewsDetails.aspx?newsid=10


By the way, I read an article about what was blamed as a wolf attack on a pet in Illinois, the assumption was made because the footprint was 4.5x3.5 inches. Heres a few reference photos of the size of my husky and his enormous snowshoe footprints (4.25x3.5 inches), yet he is almost half the size and weight of an average male gray wolf.

hmm...FAQ from http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/basic/faqs/faq.asp#12

12. How big is a gray wolf's track?

The size of a wolf's track is dependent on the age and size of the wolf, as well as the substrate the track was made in. A good size estimate for a gray wolf's track size is 4 1/2 inches long by 3 1/2 inches wide. In comparison, a coyote's track will be closer to 2 1/2 inches long by 1 1/2 inches wide. Only a few breeds of dogs leave tracks longer than 4 inches (Great Danes, St. Bernards, and some bloodhounds).

The 10th ammendment allows each State to run its own wildlife programs, as long as it doesnt conflict with Federal laws(i.e. hunting of endangered/protected animals). What interest do people living in Alaska, California, Florida or New York have with what Wyoming, Montana or Idaho do? They should have no say in it. It ticks me off when non residents think its best if we have certain wildlife in our land. Its my tax dollars that pays to manage those wolves. Not the people in California who cried for re-intorduction. I think we should re-introduce Grizzly bears into the bay area of California. Apparently they have a say in what wildlife we should have.

[buck460XVR]

Beware of VHD's with German bloodlines! They sound cool, but the dogs have some issues that aren't compatible with American expectations, at least in populated areas.


really?


I have owned Drahthaars most of my adult life, my oldest son has one himself. They do love to hunt and if encouraged will kill cats, but many of mine have lived beside house/barn cats their whole lives and just ignored them. Around here a cat(any cat) roaming at large is considered feral............and legal game.

[ArmedBear]

Not saying they aren't good dogs. And a dog is not a breed is not a dog.

Pardon my wording if it sounded like I was talking about all dogs of a breed, or even all dogs within a narrow category.

The fact is, the Germans have bred, and still breed for some traits that we don't necessarily want.

http://www.gundogmag.com/gundog_breeds/deutsch_1031/

That doesn't mean your dogs have that trait, or have an undesirable form of it, either.

However, just to show I wasn't writing out of my ass and insulting your dogs...:)

From a breeder's site http://www.drahthaars.net :
There are many stories of German breeders who participated in events that tested the aggression factor of their dogs. These trialers dug a hole, covered it with planks, and further covered it with dirt. An assistant released a Badger from its cage into this hole. Each handler brought his dog to this spot to test the dog’s ferocity and instinct to kill. It was not a matter of whether the dog could dispatch the Badger, but how many seconds it took to kill it. Two of the highly toted breeds were the Jadgterrier and the Drahthaar. Some Drahthaar breeders believe that a dog that has a high “instinct to kill” will never refuse a command; no matter how difficult. The aggression test is a part of the VDD testing.
...
In America, when a person owns a dog, he has a personal responsibility towards his neighbors, other people’s pets, and members of their family. To breed and own Wirehairs that have an excessive aggressive instinct is a liability. Nothing will spoil a day in the field faster than when a hunter brings along a dog that wishes to fight other dogs. Owners of such unruly and undisciplined animals cannot hunt them with others and they should not bring them to public areas. This trait does not produce superior or more reliable hunters. Breeders that encourage such breeding practices produce menaces to society.


The aggression test is still performed on all German dogs owned by members of the VDD. It is a measure of the "instinct to kill". This instinct can be triggered in pups as early as 4 weeks of age. I have seen litters of pups, which must be separated from each other because the "instinct to kill" was too great.

[d2wing]

Someone of you obviously have never lived in the country or had to deal with wild animals destroying your food and livelihood. Stay in the city and myob.
Cyotes and wolves are not the same animals btw.

[dogrunner]

Idaho LT1.\\


Had that incident occured here in Florida that person would've been charged with felony armed trespass for coming on the property gun in hand. Further, his PROPER action would've been to sue the offender, not kill his dog.

Had the same incident occured hereabouts when a local rancher decided to kill some deer dogs that were running on his land......he did, and the response was that four plus of his Arabians wound up with a .22 magnum in their gut.

What's good for one is good for another!

[Harve Curry]

It is a differnt culture and terrain in the west and southwest. We cannot run dogs on deer, only bear and cougar. If a dog is chasing horses or cattle he's probably going to get shot, once they start it's almost immpossible to stop them. Ranchers, hired help, and deputy sheriffs shoot dogs. It's more the people that own them and know better but don't care, that let there dogs run unattended.

[cassandrasdaddy]

took me a while to adjust to running deer with dogs when i tell my relatives they react the same way i did when they drove out on the ice with me in the car to go fishing