Wolf Attack (Pics not Suitable for Some)
- Thread starter sierrabravo45
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
As far as the wolf thing goes. The affected wolf depository states are not wanting to "wipe out" the wolf populations. They are merely demanding a way to deal with managing the populations and to handle a depredating wolf without becoming criminals. Oh and by the way you can not legally shoot a wolf that is killing your dog by law in the reintroduction states to do so is a Federal Felony. What do you think about this reintroduction program and it's more than slightly oppresive rules now?
Ok from our previous post we have learned a tiny little bit about hunting with dogs maybe we can learn a tiny little bit more. Bear with me if you will, I am passionate about this subject and have been a bear and cat guide who used hounds in the past. I do not consider myself a "houndsmen" as that is far too complimentary of title for me to claim.
The pursuit only season is exclusively for the training of bear dogs PERIOD. Whether you think it's stupid or not to be able to carry firearms legally is besides the point. You see in many states if you are carrying a firearm during pursuit season the DG&F considers that to be hunting not pursuing. If you don't hunt with hounds I guess it's impossible for you to understand the need to train new dogs every season to keep up with attrition and figure out which dogs are going to make the cut and which ones aren't.
While I can tell you that for obvious and before mentioned reasons I always carry a firearm in the wilderness. A good houndsmen with a seasoned pack of hounds seldom finds a need for a firearm unless he's actually going to kill the bear or cat he's pursuing. Here's why.
I'd dare say that there isn't a black bear on the planet that can work through three good bear dogs. I've seen a good pack put an aggressive big old male blackie up a tree 4 times in a row. The way a good hound pack works a bear is by hitting him from multiple angles at the same time with incredible speed and never latching on. They just dive in and out like a pack featherweight boxers nipping the bear, when the bear turns to get a dog another one hits him from a different angle keeping him spinning and turning totally confusing the bruin. Pretty soon all ole blackie wants to do is either exit the country or get up a tree. Of course the dogs job is to stay with the bear until he's had enough and trees up for good. It takes one hell of a special and brave dog to do this job. I'd put up three good dogs against a green horn with a .44 any day of the week for effective bear defense no two ways about it. A good dog is mans best friend under the most challenging circumstances.
Here are some hound hunting terms you should know.
When the dogs are milling around looking for a hot scent it's called "casting"
When they hit a scent it's called "Striking".
The time between the strike and sighting the animal is called the "race". The race is run by dogs who are either "hot trailing", that is on a straight line hell bent for leather on a hot scent or "cold trailing" where the dogs lose and reacquire the trail or they may be "sight trailing" where the dogs are visually chasing the critter. A good hounds men knows by the sound of the bark the dog is making what mode his dogs are in.
The dogs will race until they tree up or loose the scent or tire out. The race can go on for many hours and multiple miles across some of the toughest terrain on the planet. This is where we separate the men from the boys, most people are completely incapable of following the race from a strike to a tree. Hound hunting is the most physically demanding hunting that a person can do, bar none. I’ve had grand slam sheep hunters tell me they didn’t work half as hard for their sheep that they did for their properly hunted hound chased bear. Especially when the critter being chased goes "jackrabbit" that’s a bear or a cat that won't tree up or won't stay treed up. If you ever start hunting bear with hounds you must be prepared to walk and ride further into the wilds than you ever have before and you must also be prepared to siwash with minimal equipment on a regular basis because hounds will take you places you never dreamed of going or never wanted to go and once they start there is no stopping them. You go where they go until they end it some times spending cold nights in rugged country with only the gear you have on.
A good proven dry land cat or bear dog can be worth over $10,000 USD a good dog man is becoming a rare breed and they are some of the last true mountain men left in Americas. They are a rugged tough breed of individuals they become deeply attatched to their dogs and their horses or mules as their very life depends on them at times. Most of the ones I know carry some kind of revolver in their packs or in their trucks or on a saddle at all times. But most don't feel they need to carry one for bear protection when they have between 4 and 8 good hounds with them. Apparently in wolf country that just ain't so.
It absolutely SICKENS me to see a bunch of citified wana be "hunters" rail against houndsmen. The VAST majority of these arm chair, outdoor network watching, Real Tree wearing, once a year deer hunting fools have no knowledge of the tradition or the time and effort that goes into hunting with hounds not to mention the extreme physical stamina required and the vast amount of outdoor knowledge it takes to be a successful hounds men. The hunting houndsmen is one of the last true vestiges of our outdoor heritage they are link to our not so distant past, the last of a breed of truly in tune rugged outdoorsmen and what every hunter dreams he could be at some time in his life. And the average fat assed lazy boy "hunter" is doing his level headed best with his miss notions and misunderstandings of this great sport to destroy this truly American and extremely rugged way of life.
THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE SHOULD BE ASHAMED !!!
Because wether you know it or not your seemingly innocent way of hunting will be the next one on the chopping block.
PS
Doublenaughtspy
I asked you a question and would appreciate it if you would be man enough to answer it in public. Are you or are you not an anti hunter?
Ok from our previous post we have learned a tiny little bit about hunting with dogs maybe we can learn a tiny little bit more. Bear with me if you will, I am passionate about this subject and have been a bear and cat guide who used hounds in the past. I do not consider myself a "houndsmen" as that is far too complimentary of title for me to claim.
The pursuit only season is exclusively for the training of bear dogs PERIOD. Whether you think it's stupid or not to be able to carry firearms legally is besides the point. You see in many states if you are carrying a firearm during pursuit season the DG&F considers that to be hunting not pursuing. If you don't hunt with hounds I guess it's impossible for you to understand the need to train new dogs every season to keep up with attrition and figure out which dogs are going to make the cut and which ones aren't.
While I can tell you that for obvious and before mentioned reasons I always carry a firearm in the wilderness. A good houndsmen with a seasoned pack of hounds seldom finds a need for a firearm unless he's actually going to kill the bear or cat he's pursuing. Here's why.
I'd dare say that there isn't a black bear on the planet that can work through three good bear dogs. I've seen a good pack put an aggressive big old male blackie up a tree 4 times in a row. The way a good hound pack works a bear is by hitting him from multiple angles at the same time with incredible speed and never latching on. They just dive in and out like a pack featherweight boxers nipping the bear, when the bear turns to get a dog another one hits him from a different angle keeping him spinning and turning totally confusing the bruin. Pretty soon all ole blackie wants to do is either exit the country or get up a tree. Of course the dogs job is to stay with the bear until he's had enough and trees up for good. It takes one hell of a special and brave dog to do this job. I'd put up three good dogs against a green horn with a .44 any day of the week for effective bear defense no two ways about it. A good dog is mans best friend under the most challenging circumstances.
Here are some hound hunting terms you should know.
When the dogs are milling around looking for a hot scent it's called "casting"
When they hit a scent it's called "Striking".
The time between the strike and sighting the animal is called the "race". The race is run by dogs who are either "hot trailing", that is on a straight line hell bent for leather on a hot scent or "cold trailing" where the dogs lose and reacquire the trail or they may be "sight trailing" where the dogs are visually chasing the critter. A good hounds men knows by the sound of the bark the dog is making what mode his dogs are in.
The dogs will race until they tree up or loose the scent or tire out. The race can go on for many hours and multiple miles across some of the toughest terrain on the planet. This is where we separate the men from the boys, most people are completely incapable of following the race from a strike to a tree. Hound hunting is the most physically demanding hunting that a person can do, bar none. I’ve had grand slam sheep hunters tell me they didn’t work half as hard for their sheep that they did for their properly hunted hound chased bear. Especially when the critter being chased goes "jackrabbit" that’s a bear or a cat that won't tree up or won't stay treed up. If you ever start hunting bear with hounds you must be prepared to walk and ride further into the wilds than you ever have before and you must also be prepared to siwash with minimal equipment on a regular basis because hounds will take you places you never dreamed of going or never wanted to go and once they start there is no stopping them. You go where they go until they end it some times spending cold nights in rugged country with only the gear you have on.
A good proven dry land cat or bear dog can be worth over $10,000 USD a good dog man is becoming a rare breed and they are some of the last true mountain men left in Americas. They are a rugged tough breed of individuals they become deeply attatched to their dogs and their horses or mules as their very life depends on them at times. Most of the ones I know carry some kind of revolver in their packs or in their trucks or on a saddle at all times. But most don't feel they need to carry one for bear protection when they have between 4 and 8 good hounds with them. Apparently in wolf country that just ain't so.
It absolutely SICKENS me to see a bunch of citified wana be "hunters" rail against houndsmen. The VAST majority of these arm chair, outdoor network watching, Real Tree wearing, once a year deer hunting fools have no knowledge of the tradition or the time and effort that goes into hunting with hounds not to mention the extreme physical stamina required and the vast amount of outdoor knowledge it takes to be a successful hounds men. The hunting houndsmen is one of the last true vestiges of our outdoor heritage they are link to our not so distant past, the last of a breed of truly in tune rugged outdoorsmen and what every hunter dreams he could be at some time in his life. And the average fat assed lazy boy "hunter" is doing his level headed best with his miss notions and misunderstandings of this great sport to destroy this truly American and extremely rugged way of life.
THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE SHOULD BE ASHAMED !!!
Because wether you know it or not your seemingly innocent way of hunting will be the next one on the chopping block.
PS
Doublenaughtspy
I asked you a question and would appreciate it if you would be man enough to answer it in public. Are you or are you not an anti hunter?
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
There used to be a man in Alpine, Texas, named Roy McBride. Dog man. On up into his eighties, he regularly worked his dog pack some fifteen miles a day in mountain country. Mr. McBride was regularly hired to work lions: Both cougars in the U.S. and real lions in Africa. He trained people as well as dogs...
Cosmoline, poachers bring on a lot of the "dumb" laws or regulations. For instance, in some states you can't shoot a deer that's been hit by a car because they worry that a poacher would shoot a deer by a road and claim it was first hit by a vehicle. Same for carrying a firearm during bow season, or a modern gun during blackpowder season.
Again, as emphasized by H&H, the guys in Idaho didn't have bear trouble, they had wolf trouble. Heck, I don't always carry a gun here on my land, and I have mountain lions all around the place--but in 23 years here, no problems. No wolves, either--yet.
Art
Cosmoline, poachers bring on a lot of the "dumb" laws or regulations. For instance, in some states you can't shoot a deer that's been hit by a car because they worry that a poacher would shoot a deer by a road and claim it was first hit by a vehicle. Same for carrying a firearm during bow season, or a modern gun during blackpowder season.
Again, as emphasized by H&H, the guys in Idaho didn't have bear trouble, they had wolf trouble. Heck, I don't always carry a gun here on my land, and I have mountain lions all around the place--but in 23 years here, no problems. No wolves, either--yet.
Art
swampdog
Member
An excellent description of hound hunting, H&H. It's tough enough in the swamp. I can only imagine what it's like in the mountains.
The guys I know that run bear tree many more than they kill, just like some coon hunters I know. It certainly isn't all about killing. My neighbor has around 30 dogs in his pen, some of them deer dogs. It's a full time hobby for him. He certainly puts a large amount of work into them as well as a huge chunk of his income.
I know my neighbor has lost dogs in the past. One of the days last year I hunted with him, he had 2 that needed stitches. He uses a staple gun like they have at the ER.
These are hunting dogs, though, not family pets. I feel like the guy that did the newspaper interview has an axe to grind about the wolves and he played up to the media. I don't doubt that wolves ate his dogs, I am kind of leary of the histrionics, though.
People around here raised cain over the reintroduction of the red wolf. So far, I don't think it has been successful enough to cause many problems. Red wolves are quite a bit smaller than Canadian greys, though, and I can see why people in Idaho are "upset". As far as getting a felony for killing a wolf that was attacking you or your animals, stupid laws are meant to be ignored. My friend that killed the red wolf in his chicken pen got his picture in a national magazine. No charges were ever pressed.
The guys I know that run bear tree many more than they kill, just like some coon hunters I know. It certainly isn't all about killing. My neighbor has around 30 dogs in his pen, some of them deer dogs. It's a full time hobby for him. He certainly puts a large amount of work into them as well as a huge chunk of his income.
I know my neighbor has lost dogs in the past. One of the days last year I hunted with him, he had 2 that needed stitches. He uses a staple gun like they have at the ER.
These are hunting dogs, though, not family pets. I feel like the guy that did the newspaper interview has an axe to grind about the wolves and he played up to the media. I don't doubt that wolves ate his dogs, I am kind of leary of the histrionics, though.
People around here raised cain over the reintroduction of the red wolf. So far, I don't think it has been successful enough to cause many problems. Red wolves are quite a bit smaller than Canadian greys, though, and I can see why people in Idaho are "upset". As far as getting a felony for killing a wolf that was attacking you or your animals, stupid laws are meant to be ignored. My friend that killed the red wolf in his chicken pen got his picture in a national magazine. No charges were ever pressed.
Cosmoline
Member
Then those state F&G departments are as bad or worse than any feds, and the regs should be changed. Just like those hunters who got burned by the wee Hmong fellow, I do wonder what the devil they're doing in the woods with no iron. You just don't do that. It's a good idea to armed into wild places for a lot of reasons, and if regs prohibit it then the regs are stupid and should be changed at once.
A federal felony to do a DLP? By what law?
I have no problem with houndsmen, and I'm well aware of the physical difficulties and stamina required to hunt in rural Idaho. But nowhere did I read anyone on this thread saying the man was lazy or that hunting with hounds was bad. It just strikes me as a real bad idea to let novice dogs run around and have NOTHING to help defend them if they get in over their heads. And according to his own story, those concerns are well justified.
Anyway--aren't there griz in Id? A griz can go through a pack of dogs and have enough sand left to eat your liver. Heck there are pissed off elk in there I wouldn't want to tangle with.
I hope to never have to shoot anyone or anything in self defense, but I still pack heat everywhere I go. In the woods I take a rifle. Nobody has bear trouble until they have a whole lot of trouble. I could be like Timmy boy and note that I've been hiking in bear country for years and no bear has ever tried to attack me, but look where that road ends.
No matter where you are or what you're doing, SOMETHING or SOMEONE is out there who'll kill you if your paths happen to cross at the right time in the right circumstances. When this happens you can blame society or blame the President or blame the feds or blame nature, but none of that will stop it from happening. You just need to be prepared for the dark shadow to cross your path.
Anyway, everyone knows REAL men hunt bears buck naked with CATS, not dogs.
Last edited:
trapperjohn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2004
- Messages
- 567
i can not believe the ignorance expoused on this thread. on top of that, I can not believe the long pontifications of those that have this ignorance.
the next time someone here rails about hunters not doing anything to support the RTKBA I want them to remeber this thread and realize that not all RTKBA fanatatics support hunting rights.
I just wish people with virtually nill hunting nowledge would stop standing in judgement of hunters whose whose sport the poster knows nothing about.
In my state and in many states it is Prima facia evidence of hunting (poacihng)if someone is in a habitat known to contain game and has a firearm. If Idaho is the same way then this man could have lost a lot if caught with a firearm during the pursuit season.
in ANY kind of huntig involving dogs is concerned, the most effective mode of training is having young dogs with experianced dogs. thats why this man let some inexperianced dogs out, he was doing the responsible thing and TRAINING Them.
In addition many states do have a pursuit season where the dogs are used to tree game.
A man does the responsible thing, obeys the law, suffers a financial and emotional loss, and our "freedom loving" gun owners crucify him :banghead: :banghead:
the next time someone here rails about hunters not doing anything to support the RTKBA I want them to remeber this thread and realize that not all RTKBA fanatatics support hunting rights.
I just wish people with virtually nill hunting nowledge would stop standing in judgement of hunters whose whose sport the poster knows nothing about.
In my state and in many states it is Prima facia evidence of hunting (poacihng)if someone is in a habitat known to contain game and has a firearm. If Idaho is the same way then this man could have lost a lot if caught with a firearm during the pursuit season.
in ANY kind of huntig involving dogs is concerned, the most effective mode of training is having young dogs with experianced dogs. thats why this man let some inexperianced dogs out, he was doing the responsible thing and TRAINING Them.
In addition many states do have a pursuit season where the dogs are used to tree game.
A man does the responsible thing, obeys the law, suffers a financial and emotional loss, and our "freedom loving" gun owners crucify him :banghead: :banghead:
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
By the federal wolf reintroduction program protective laws.
Cosmoline,
It's time for you to WAKE UP on this wolf reintroduction thing down here. This program is leftist government oppresion at it's ugliest. Animals over people and government not by the people but by a small special interst group that cannot be affected by their actions as they don't live or work in the affected areas. Thank you very much Bill Clinton!
It is illegal to kill a wolf for any reason what so ever. And specifically the regs state that you can not harm a wolf that is attacking your dog. Hell you can't even legally kill a wolf that you witness killing your live stock. You are supposed to call the feds and they'll come out and investigate the scene and let you know if they'll reimburse you for your loses. It is a felony to kill a wolf for any reason in the effected states by current law.
Can you now see why these people are more than just a bit pissed off with this program?
Not true in fact I've got an aquiantance who protects his camps in Wyoming grizz country with two grizz hating blue heelers. In 10 years he's never had a grizz decide to stay in camp with these two devil dogs on the guard. There have been many try but none feel welcome for very long.
Back in the day grizz were reguarly hunted with hound dogs. From reading about old time hunters like Ben Lilly I would surmise that hunting grizz with dogs was a true adventure. He often describes 60+ mile races before his dogs were able to catch the grizz.
That is one bad cat, must be a rare and dangerous dry red bone bear cat.
Cosmoline
Member
This is no different from NYC, Chicago or the UK where having a firearm is seen as prima facia evidence of being a career criminal. It's anti RKBA and HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HUNTING! I live in a state with more hunting per capita than any other state in the union, BAR NONE. I love to hunt. I'm not anti-hunting. But the sort of regulations you're talking about CANNOT BE DEFENDEND. They are anti-gun and anti RKBA.
But as far as this case, I thought we had established that Idaho does NOT ban firearms during the pursuit season. I hope this is the case. If it isn't, the regs need to be changed.
A man who relies on DOGS to protect him from UAH is a man waiting in line to join Timmy boy. We've had griz go through entire dog teams up here. You should not rely solely on your hunds to protect you. YOU have the obligation to back THEM up. Unless you're just using them as bear bait like the sourdoughs used to.
If this is indeed the federal law, then I agree that's totally outrageous. But while I've heard this repeated I still haven't seen any evidence that it actually *IS* federal law. What's the code provision? Where is it made a felony? I'm not saying the federales with always believe you if you claim self defense. They didn't in this case:
http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060413/NEWS01/604130334
But that doesn't mean DLP isn't a defense. It just means if you kill a griz sow because you say you thought it was a black bear and then kill the cub because you say you had to in order to claim the sow (who's radio tag you just destroyed), people may have a hard time believing you were doing a DLP and not poaching. None of these charges are federal felonies, they're misdemeanors. Indeed you'd face charges just as serious for shooting a brown bear up here out of season, where the ESA plays no role.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/6807888p-6697807c.html
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
Cosmoline,
The outfitter I am refering to as all outfitters I know, has a gun with him in camp. He's just never had to use it...yet. Those heelers have saved him a lot of time and trouble with the local fish cops. Because shooting a grizz in Wyoming is worse than shooting a person as far as I can tell.
Your point about the pursuit season regs being anti RKBA is right on. And I'm sure if you get an understanding judge he'll forfeit the ticket when you use this as a defense after shooting a bear that came out of a tree and latched onto one of your pups you've been training. (What do you think?) The problem was that in the past some unscrupulous people were shooting big bears during pursuit only seasons and claiming self defense. Various states made a deal with the dog hunters that they could keep their season but they couldn’t carry or shoot a bear for any reason. Can you see the gray area here and why lots of guys don't like to carry during pursuit seasons? It can get you in a bunch of trouble.
This is exactly why the carriage of a firearm is prohibited in some states during a pursuit only season. I didn't make the rules I don't agree with them but they are on the books for that reason. In fact I don't even follow them for common sense reasons. I also believe that they are indefensible (Shoot shovel & shut up is the motto if it ever happens to me.)
If you have any questions about the abuses being perpetrated by the feds on the good citizens of Idaho I suggest you call Mr. Tim Sundels of Buffalo Bore Ammunition and have a little chit chat with him about what happens to you if you kill a wolf in defense of Property in that state.
You and I are pretty much on the same page. But I think that you do not understand the iron fisted tactics that the feds have been using with this wolf thing. It is very difficult for any free thinking, honest man to comprehend.
PS.
Are you a fed?
Cosmoline
Member
H&H, I guess you haven't read my other posts here.
I'm the last person to defend the federales, but they're a multi headed beast. Some agencies I detest and regard as an occupying foreign power. The NPS, for example, or the BIA. Others I've never had any problems with at all and they've actually been helpful, such as the Forest Service and BLM. Our own F&G is generally pretty good, though they have their own problems. They do investigate all DLP shootings as they should, and in the recent prosecution of the kid who shot the sow with the SKS, I think there was very little evidence it was done in self defense. It was just rather sadistic poaching.
As far as the regulation of ESA listed predators in the lower 48, I don't have enough facts to come to any conclusions one way or the other. I see references to a federal felony for shooting an endangered predator under any circumstances, but a cruise of the cases doesn't seem to confirm that. I'd like to know what specific code provisions deal with this issue, but nobody seems to know where they are. The main article here was full of emotion but as far as I can tell the feds had no involvement in anything that took place. If he was banned from having a firearm that would have been a matter of state law. And I haven't seen any evidence that hunters are being prosecuted for killing wolves who are eating their dogs or livestock. The one case I could find had some rather questionable claims from the defense, such as killing a sow griz at close range with a bow because you thought she was a black bear, then destroying her tracking collar, then killing her cub.
PinnedAndRecessed
member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2004
- Messages
- 1,541
IIRC, all this was taking place during a time when the nanny-state experts were simultaneously limiting hunting.
Those idiots were anti-hunting yet were also wringing their incompetent hands about overpopulation of the above mentioned species.
All the while, those of us who hunted, were lobbying that the "experts" would simply extend game season, etc.
We all knew the reintroduction of wolves was ultimately going to be bad.
+1
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Well, Cos, as an example of justhow bad it is down here, a rancher in Montana was fined four thousand dollars for killing a grizzly bear that was in a pen by his ranch house, going after livestock. I disremember if it was calves or a horse.
It's worse with wolves.
I was talking to some New Mexico folks not long back, ranchers, and in some areas toward SW New Mexico they're almost out of business because of the reintroduction of the Mexican Wolf. One problem is that the pro-wolf entities are supposed to repay for depredations, but they always seem to find an excuse to believe that the wolf didn't do the killing. The usual problem: Unless you see the kill, it might be days or weeks before the kill is found, and the buzzards and coyotes have cleaned up the evidence.
There is an outfit called "Range Magazine". http://www.rangemagazine.com They're obviously anti-fed on the issue of reintroduction, but they do detail specific events and speak to the laws and regulations.
Art
It's worse with wolves.
I was talking to some New Mexico folks not long back, ranchers, and in some areas toward SW New Mexico they're almost out of business because of the reintroduction of the Mexican Wolf. One problem is that the pro-wolf entities are supposed to repay for depredations, but they always seem to find an excuse to believe that the wolf didn't do the killing. The usual problem: Unless you see the kill, it might be days or weeks before the kill is found, and the buzzards and coyotes have cleaned up the evidence.
There is an outfit called "Range Magazine". http://www.rangemagazine.com They're obviously anti-fed on the issue of reintroduction, but they do detail specific events and speak to the laws and regulations.
Art
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
Cosmoline,
The feds had everything to do with this. They are the ones who let the wolves loose and declared them to be holy beasts of the sacred order of the untouchable in the first place.
I didn't mean to insult you by asking if you were a fed. I was just curious.
You never know who you are talking to.
Cosmoline
Member
But are the untouchable? Would he have been put in prison for shooting one that was attacking his dog? I still haven't seen the code provision outlawing DLP shooting of predators.
Sharps Shooter
Member
Not to get off track, but to answer your question Cosmoline about if there are any grizzlies in Idaho - no, I don't believe there are any grizzlies around Grangeville. Grangeville is about in the middle of the state and on its west side. There are reported to be grizzlies way up in Idaho's northern panhandle and of course there is quite a few of them that don't recognize the boundary of Yellowstone Park which borders Idaho's east side.
If the feds would have gotten their way back when Clinton was in office, I would wager there would be a lot of grizzlies around Grangeville by now. They wanted to "reintroduce" Canadian grizzlies to the Selway-Bitteroot area of Idaho and Western Montana. That's right close to Grangeville. But as it stands now, the last verifiable death of a grizzly in the Selway-Bitteroot area occured in 1932.
If the feds would have gotten their way back when Clinton was in office, I would wager there would be a lot of grizzlies around Grangeville by now. They wanted to "reintroduce" Canadian grizzlies to the Selway-Bitteroot area of Idaho and Western Montana. That's right close to Grangeville. But as it stands now, the last verifiable death of a grizzly in the Selway-Bitteroot area occured in 1932.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
Cosmoline,
This is from the Idaho dept of Game and Fish,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private Land
Wolves seen attacking livestock (PDF Format, 702 KB), livestock herding and guarding animals, and dogs (PDF Format, 252 KB) on private land can be shot by the landowners without prior written authorization. It must be reported within 24 hours and there must be evidence of a wolf attack such as dead or wounded livestock, trampled vegetation, and mixed wolf and livestock sign. State lands are considered private for the purpose of this rule, and permitted livestock producers on state land can kill a wolf attacking their livestock.
Public Land
Wolves attacking, chasing, molesting, or harassing livestock and livestock herding and guarding animals on public federal lands can be shot by grazing permittees and guide/outfitters that use livestock as part of their federal land-use permit, on their active livestock allotments, and on public ceded lands by tribal members, without prior written authorization. It must be reported within 24 hours and there must be physical evidence of a wolf attack.
Under some circumstances landowners and public land grazing permittees and guide/outfitting permittees may be issued written authorization to use rubber bullets to harass wolves, or shoot-on-sight permits to kill wolves on their private land or their federal grazing federal allotments. Also under the revised rule, wolves determined to be causing unacceptable impacts to deer and elk populations can be controlled. This is allowed only after the states complete science-based documents that have undergone public and peer review and have been approved by the USFWS.
Under the revised rule, the states of Idaho and Montana each have developed agreements with the USFWS, listing authorities and responsibilities to lead gray wolf management in their states. Wolves in Wyoming still are managed under the old 10(j) rule, because that state doesn't have a wolf management plan approved by USFWS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no provision to shoot wolves who are attacking your dog on PUBLIC land IE Forest service or BLM.
Plain and simple the I think that any one of us here would have had a pile o dead wolves in this circumstance. But you had better not be telling anybody about it because even if you did everything right and repoted this to the federal fish cops you'd better have a whole stack of cash to defend yourself in this situation. The feds will prosecute on these cases.
Please see below!
This is from the Idaho dept of Game and Fish,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private Land
Wolves seen attacking livestock (PDF Format, 702 KB), livestock herding and guarding animals, and dogs (PDF Format, 252 KB) on private land can be shot by the landowners without prior written authorization. It must be reported within 24 hours and there must be evidence of a wolf attack such as dead or wounded livestock, trampled vegetation, and mixed wolf and livestock sign. State lands are considered private for the purpose of this rule, and permitted livestock producers on state land can kill a wolf attacking their livestock.
Public Land
Wolves attacking, chasing, molesting, or harassing livestock and livestock herding and guarding animals on public federal lands can be shot by grazing permittees and guide/outfitters that use livestock as part of their federal land-use permit, on their active livestock allotments, and on public ceded lands by tribal members, without prior written authorization. It must be reported within 24 hours and there must be physical evidence of a wolf attack.
Under some circumstances landowners and public land grazing permittees and guide/outfitting permittees may be issued written authorization to use rubber bullets to harass wolves, or shoot-on-sight permits to kill wolves on their private land or their federal grazing federal allotments. Also under the revised rule, wolves determined to be causing unacceptable impacts to deer and elk populations can be controlled. This is allowed only after the states complete science-based documents that have undergone public and peer review and have been approved by the USFWS.
Under the revised rule, the states of Idaho and Montana each have developed agreements with the USFWS, listing authorities and responsibilities to lead gray wolf management in their states. Wolves in Wyoming still are managed under the old 10(j) rule, because that state doesn't have a wolf management plan approved by USFWS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no provision to shoot wolves who are attacking your dog on PUBLIC land IE Forest service or BLM.
Plain and simple the I think that any one of us here would have had a pile o dead wolves in this circumstance. But you had better not be telling anybody about it because even if you did everything right and repoted this to the federal fish cops you'd better have a whole stack of cash to defend yourself in this situation. The feds will prosecute on these cases.
Please see below!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
Also from the Idaho Dept of Game & Fish web page
Cosmoline,
I hope that this answers your question. Please refer to the bottom of the paragraph regarding wether or not this gentlemen was within his rights to shoot these wolves.
Now you have seen the code and in specific the code addressing dogs on public lands.
Comments?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you can do to protect your dog:
Currently wolves are protected under the ESA.
However, the USFWS recently published new rules
that allow take of wolves that harass or attack
livestock or dogs on private property, known as the
“10(j)” rules. Under the new 10(j) rules,
landowners, outfitters, and permittees on private
property or grazing allotments can legally kill wolves
Bells placed on hunting dogs may reduce the
likelihood of encounters with wolves.
“attacking (killing,
wounding, or biting) or
in the act of attacking
(actively chasing,
molesting, harassing)
their livestock (includes
livestock herding &
guarding animals) or
dogs.” However, the
taking of a wolf must be
reported within 24 hours
and the injured or dead
livestock or dog and any
other evidence must be
evident to verify that a
wolf attack was
imminent. Furthermore,
where confirmed wolf
depredations of livestock
or dogs on private land
or grazing allotments
have occurred, and are
likely to occur again
based on the continued
presence of wolves, the
private landowner or
grazing allotment permittee may be issued a
“shoot-on-sight” permit. Keep in mind that it is
only legal for the land owner, outfitter, or
permittee to shoot wolves that harass or attack
dogs on private land or grazing allotments—it will
remain illegal to shoot a wolf attacking pet dogs
or hunting hounds on public land.
Cosmoline,
I hope that this answers your question. Please refer to the bottom of the paragraph regarding wether or not this gentlemen was within his rights to shoot these wolves.
Now you have seen the code and in specific the code addressing dogs on public lands.
Comments?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you can do to protect your dog:
Currently wolves are protected under the ESA.
However, the USFWS recently published new rules
that allow take of wolves that harass or attack
livestock or dogs on private property, known as the
“10(j)” rules. Under the new 10(j) rules,
landowners, outfitters, and permittees on private
property or grazing allotments can legally kill wolves
Bells placed on hunting dogs may reduce the
likelihood of encounters with wolves.
“attacking (killing,
wounding, or biting) or
in the act of attacking
(actively chasing,
molesting, harassing)
their livestock (includes
livestock herding &
guarding animals) or
dogs.” However, the
taking of a wolf must be
reported within 24 hours
and the injured or dead
livestock or dog and any
other evidence must be
evident to verify that a
wolf attack was
imminent. Furthermore,
where confirmed wolf
depredations of livestock
or dogs on private land
or grazing allotments
have occurred, and are
likely to occur again
based on the continued
presence of wolves, the
private landowner or
grazing allotment permittee may be issued a
“shoot-on-sight” permit. Keep in mind that it is
only legal for the land owner, outfitter, or
permittee to shoot wolves that harass or attack
dogs on private land or grazing allotments—it will
remain illegal to shoot a wolf attacking pet dogs
or hunting hounds on public land.
Well I for one wasn't trying to come off as a tree hugger. But I do consider myself a conservationist.
H&H thanks for the info on the catch and relesae bear season... since the spring bear hunt was banned here in CO I never imagined such a thing existed. I stand corrected on the laws and how they force a man to make his choices.
On hunting with dogs:
I know full well the value of a hunting dog... I've come across bear while grouse hunting before and beleive me my FIRST reaction was to get my well trained dogs out of dodge. (One of them had a close encounter with a bear and ran all the way back to the truck to hide.) I also chose NOT to return to that area without a BIG pistol (at the time I was armed only with a shotgun and birdshot) which you CAN open carry in CO.
I can't imagine going out in the woods without a firearm. Even a warning shot could have saved one or more of his dogs. I feel bad for the guy, I do.
Back to wolves:
Seriously... there is an old Russian Proverb that 'wolves eat dogs' for a reason. To a wolf a dog is a rival. It may or may not feed on your dog but if it runs into a dog on what it thinks is ITS territory, your dog is in danger.
In fact in almost every kind of hunting with dogs (raccoons, wild boar, bear, etc) there is a risk to the dog's saftey. Someone once explained to me that 'bay dogs' were valuable, fighters are a dime a dozen (he was discussing knife hunting for feral pigs.) I'm not sure I can get behind 'devaluing' a dog like that, but some people do.
But what happened here in THIS incident?
Is the wolf to blame for being a wolf? Is the Division of Wildlife guilty for NOT letting hunters cull predators in the act of attacking a dog? Is the guide not guilty of at least going unprepared?
Wolves are returning to our ecosystem, most times in an ecosytem that is VASTLY different from when they went extinct. The 'experts' don't have it all figured out yet, and I think there is room for discussion on both sides, and room for the experts to re-evaluate what is working and what isn't.
As hunters we should make a POINT to be involved in that discussion, and I hope that's what we are doing here... discussing rather than berating each other.
Knowledge is power, thanks for sharing.
H&H thanks for the info on the catch and relesae bear season... since the spring bear hunt was banned here in CO I never imagined such a thing existed. I stand corrected on the laws and how they force a man to make his choices.
On hunting with dogs:
I know full well the value of a hunting dog... I've come across bear while grouse hunting before and beleive me my FIRST reaction was to get my well trained dogs out of dodge. (One of them had a close encounter with a bear and ran all the way back to the truck to hide.) I also chose NOT to return to that area without a BIG pistol (at the time I was armed only with a shotgun and birdshot) which you CAN open carry in CO.
I can't imagine going out in the woods without a firearm. Even a warning shot could have saved one or more of his dogs. I feel bad for the guy, I do.
Back to wolves:
Seriously... there is an old Russian Proverb that 'wolves eat dogs' for a reason. To a wolf a dog is a rival. It may or may not feed on your dog but if it runs into a dog on what it thinks is ITS territory, your dog is in danger.
In fact in almost every kind of hunting with dogs (raccoons, wild boar, bear, etc) there is a risk to the dog's saftey. Someone once explained to me that 'bay dogs' were valuable, fighters are a dime a dozen (he was discussing knife hunting for feral pigs.) I'm not sure I can get behind 'devaluing' a dog like that, but some people do.
But what happened here in THIS incident?
Is the wolf to blame for being a wolf? Is the Division of Wildlife guilty for NOT letting hunters cull predators in the act of attacking a dog? Is the guide not guilty of at least going unprepared?
Wolves are returning to our ecosystem, most times in an ecosytem that is VASTLY different from when they went extinct. The 'experts' don't have it all figured out yet, and I think there is room for discussion on both sides, and room for the experts to re-evaluate what is working and what isn't.
As hunters we should make a POINT to be involved in that discussion, and I hope that's what we are doing here... discussing rather than berating each other.
Knowledge is power, thanks for sharing.
H&Hhunter
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,207 HEY GUYS!!! HAVE ANY OF YOU ARMCHAIR EXPERTS EVER HEARD OF PURSUIT SEASON????
Apparently NOT!
That is a season, usually in the spring that is set aside for the pursuit only of bears with dogs for the purpose of training bear dogs. The bear is not killed but only treed and then let loose. In case some of you guys didn’t know it hound hunting is one of the only forms of catch and release hunting on the planet. The hounds men is NOT allowed to carry a firearm during pursuit only season although many do for obvious reasons but they risk a fine by doing so. The hounds men will use older dogs mixed in with younger dogs. The older dogs do much of the training of the younger dogs once a scent is hit.
Doublenaught writes,
Quote:
If he is so concerned about his dogs, maybe he should keep them in sight better than just letting them loose to roam and chase. Just because bears may turn tail does not mean he has been sufficient as a dog trainer in letting them roam on their own.
Dear Mr spy,
This may be one of the ALL time most ignorant statements ever written on this or ANY hunting forum in existence. You sir have OBVIOUSLY never hunted bear or cat behind hounds. And while that doesn't stop you from posting like you do have some knowledge if you had even the slightest idea of what you were talking about you'd realize just how ridiculous that statement was. Hounds do not stay in sight of the hunter after "striking" a solid scent. Once a solid scent is hit the dogs take off in pursuit and you may not see them again for many many hours.
Which brings us into point of fact number two.
Since there is no possible way of keeping pace with a pack of hot trailing hounds they have been bred to bark and bay loudly so that the hunter can locate them during the pursuit and after they tree an animal DUHHHH!!!!!
Which pretty much covers this little jewel that was also written by Doublenaught,
Quote:
Wolves eat. Scott trains his dogs to chase other animals, such as bears, tree them, remain on station until he arrives, barking the entire time. Translation to other predators such as wolves, "We are a bunch of stupid citified dogs with no gun toting master around and we have treed a bear and will keep yelling until our master comes and hope that in the meantime that we aren't calling out to other predators that the dinner bell has rung and that they won't attracted to our sounds that give the impression we are a bunch of weak, wounded animals as no predators in the wild waste time and energy screaming at the top of their lungs like we do because they don't want to be eaten either."
Sir right here and right now you tell me what animal on this planet predator or not besides a pack of wolves will be attracted to a pack of baying hounds!
Double I have to ask you this public forum if you are a hunter , if you have ever hunted, and what are your true motifs in regards to posting on this forum? Some of the statements you’ve made in the past have got me thinking that there is something a little more sinister than just a name in regards to your handle. Are you or are you not an anti hunter. Because you sure as heck sound like one most of the time.
People who have drank the cool aid on these wolf reintroduction programs fail to see the big picture. This is the most effective anti hunting program ever devised and will effectively wipeout big game hunting in many areas of the United States
Wolves have been knocking the heck out of hunting dogs in many other areas too. This is nothing new. It doesn’t bother me that wolves have been reintroduced into several areas. Yellowstone being one of them. What does bother me is that the local citizens had no say in the process. That affected states do not have any oversight or management tools to control wolf populations. That these wolves remain federally protected once they leave their intended reintroduction areas. That people are not allowed to defend themselves or their property from wolves and are criminalized if they do. That the federal government has maintained draconian rules with regards to wolves and are generally acting like a bunch of oppressive leftist animal rights nazis in regards to the whole wolf program.
Some of you guys sound like a bunch of fuzzy legged tree huggers wearing stop the killing tee shirts standing in line to get into the re-elect bilHillary meeting!
I can't even believe some of the CRAP I'm reading here!
Cosmoline,
I agree with your premise about wild country and teeth. However having lived in AK for awhile I seem to remember many of the same arguments about wolves and I still hear them today in regards to big game population and in particular these arguments when Ak stopped aerial shooting of wolves.
Most pointedly Alaskans would FREAK out if the federal government decided to, without the approval of Alaskans reintroduce some animal into the state than declare it to be the holy grail of all animals which can never be managed by the human hand and not allow the state of AK to have any say in its management. And of course there is a hunting season on wolves in AK. That is all that Idaho residents are asking for at this point. A way to manage the burgeoning wolf population.
__________________
If you ever have the good fortune to get tangled up with an elephant at close range in tight cover. I promise you the last thing on your mind will be "Well, Bell used a 7X57 mauser......"
Double rifle,The weapon that made Africa safe for the bolt gun..
A man hasn't truely lived until he's been to a place where he isn't the top of the food chain.
H&H great post.
As an Idahoan and an extremely avid sportsman year round (when I am conus) I must say that I get the impression that many of the posters, though well intentioned, do not know much about the various methods of hunting big game outside of deer or pigs. Not that that is a bad thing but hunting in the wilderness areas of central idaho is not the same as a hunting lease in the south that "grows" whitetails.
BTW, I can on any given night take my coyote howler and howl from my dads back deck in the mountains of central Idaho and have a number of wolves anwer. It is great to tell that to city folks who don't believe it, then watch as their eyes get HUGE when I do it
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,207 HEY GUYS!!! HAVE ANY OF YOU ARMCHAIR EXPERTS EVER HEARD OF PURSUIT SEASON????
Apparently NOT!
That is a season, usually in the spring that is set aside for the pursuit only of bears with dogs for the purpose of training bear dogs. The bear is not killed but only treed and then let loose. In case some of you guys didn’t know it hound hunting is one of the only forms of catch and release hunting on the planet. The hounds men is NOT allowed to carry a firearm during pursuit only season although many do for obvious reasons but they risk a fine by doing so. The hounds men will use older dogs mixed in with younger dogs. The older dogs do much of the training of the younger dogs once a scent is hit.
Doublenaught writes,
Quote:
If he is so concerned about his dogs, maybe he should keep them in sight better than just letting them loose to roam and chase. Just because bears may turn tail does not mean he has been sufficient as a dog trainer in letting them roam on their own.
Dear Mr spy,
This may be one of the ALL time most ignorant statements ever written on this or ANY hunting forum in existence. You sir have OBVIOUSLY never hunted bear or cat behind hounds. And while that doesn't stop you from posting like you do have some knowledge if you had even the slightest idea of what you were talking about you'd realize just how ridiculous that statement was. Hounds do not stay in sight of the hunter after "striking" a solid scent. Once a solid scent is hit the dogs take off in pursuit and you may not see them again for many many hours.
Which brings us into point of fact number two.
Since there is no possible way of keeping pace with a pack of hot trailing hounds they have been bred to bark and bay loudly so that the hunter can locate them during the pursuit and after they tree an animal DUHHHH!!!!!
Which pretty much covers this little jewel that was also written by Doublenaught,
Quote:
Wolves eat. Scott trains his dogs to chase other animals, such as bears, tree them, remain on station until he arrives, barking the entire time. Translation to other predators such as wolves, "We are a bunch of stupid citified dogs with no gun toting master around and we have treed a bear and will keep yelling until our master comes and hope that in the meantime that we aren't calling out to other predators that the dinner bell has rung and that they won't attracted to our sounds that give the impression we are a bunch of weak, wounded animals as no predators in the wild waste time and energy screaming at the top of their lungs like we do because they don't want to be eaten either."
Sir right here and right now you tell me what animal on this planet predator or not besides a pack of wolves will be attracted to a pack of baying hounds!
Double I have to ask you this public forum if you are a hunter , if you have ever hunted, and what are your true motifs in regards to posting on this forum? Some of the statements you’ve made in the past have got me thinking that there is something a little more sinister than just a name in regards to your handle. Are you or are you not an anti hunter. Because you sure as heck sound like one most of the time.
People who have drank the cool aid on these wolf reintroduction programs fail to see the big picture. This is the most effective anti hunting program ever devised and will effectively wipeout big game hunting in many areas of the United States
Wolves have been knocking the heck out of hunting dogs in many other areas too. This is nothing new. It doesn’t bother me that wolves have been reintroduced into several areas. Yellowstone being one of them. What does bother me is that the local citizens had no say in the process. That affected states do not have any oversight or management tools to control wolf populations. That these wolves remain federally protected once they leave their intended reintroduction areas. That people are not allowed to defend themselves or their property from wolves and are criminalized if they do. That the federal government has maintained draconian rules with regards to wolves and are generally acting like a bunch of oppressive leftist animal rights nazis in regards to the whole wolf program.
Some of you guys sound like a bunch of fuzzy legged tree huggers wearing stop the killing tee shirts standing in line to get into the re-elect bilHillary meeting!
I can't even believe some of the CRAP I'm reading here!
Cosmoline,
I agree with your premise about wild country and teeth. However having lived in AK for awhile I seem to remember many of the same arguments about wolves and I still hear them today in regards to big game population and in particular these arguments when Ak stopped aerial shooting of wolves.
Most pointedly Alaskans would FREAK out if the federal government decided to, without the approval of Alaskans reintroduce some animal into the state than declare it to be the holy grail of all animals which can never be managed by the human hand and not allow the state of AK to have any say in its management. And of course there is a hunting season on wolves in AK. That is all that Idaho residents are asking for at this point. A way to manage the burgeoning wolf population.
__________________
If you ever have the good fortune to get tangled up with an elephant at close range in tight cover. I promise you the last thing on your mind will be "Well, Bell used a 7X57 mauser......"
Double rifle,The weapon that made Africa safe for the bolt gun..
A man hasn't truely lived until he's been to a place where he isn't the top of the food chain.
H&H great post.
As an Idahoan and an extremely avid sportsman year round (when I am conus) I must say that I get the impression that many of the posters, though well intentioned, do not know much about the various methods of hunting big game outside of deer or pigs. Not that that is a bad thing but hunting in the wilderness areas of central idaho is not the same as a hunting lease in the south that "grows" whitetails.
BTW, I can on any given night take my coyote howler and howl from my dads back deck in the mountains of central Idaho and have a number of wolves anwer. It is great to tell that to city folks who don't believe it, then watch as their eyes get HUGE when I do it
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
IV Troop, you make some very good points. Howsomever, calm down the vituperative rhetoric as you express your ideas, okay?
And that goes for everybody else, as well.
Art
And that goes for everybody else, as well.
Art
Art,
I think there was some confusion on what I posted. I simply cut and pasted H&H's post which I happen to agree with the majority of the content.
This part is what I addded on the end:
As an Idahoan and an extremely avid sportsman year round (when I am conus) I must say that I get the impression that many of the posters, though well intentioned, do not know much about the various methods of hunting big game outside of deer or pigs. Not that that is a bad thing but hunting in the wilderness areas of central idaho is not the same as a hunting lease in the south that "grows" whitetails.
BTW, I can on any given night take my coyote howler and howl from my dads back deck in the mountains of central Idaho and have a number of wolves anwer. It is great to tell that to city folks who don't believe it, then watch as their eyes get HUGE when I do it
I HOPE you did not find that too offensive
Thanks, IV TROOP
I think there was some confusion on what I posted. I simply cut and pasted H&H's post which I happen to agree with the majority of the content.
This part is what I addded on the end:
As an Idahoan and an extremely avid sportsman year round (when I am conus) I must say that I get the impression that many of the posters, though well intentioned, do not know much about the various methods of hunting big game outside of deer or pigs. Not that that is a bad thing but hunting in the wilderness areas of central idaho is not the same as a hunting lease in the south that "grows" whitetails.
BTW, I can on any given night take my coyote howler and howl from my dads back deck in the mountains of central Idaho and have a number of wolves anwer. It is great to tell that to city folks who don't believe it, then watch as their eyes get HUGE when I do it
I HOPE you did not find that too offensive
Thanks, IV TROOP
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,337
QUOTE]Howsomever, calm down the vituperative rhetoric as you express your ideas, okay?
[/QUOTE]
Art,
That was all me. IV did nothing more than cut and paste them.
Dr Rob,
Did you or did you not see the part about.....
"it will remain illegal to shoot a wolf attacking pet dogs
or hunting hounds on public land"
My point is simply that the federal government has us between a rock and a hard place. These laws are unjust they force us to make choices that a free man shouldn't have to make. And they were put into place without the concurrence of the local people whom are to be affected by them.
And finally I am trying to point out that there are more ways to hunt than sitting in a deer stand over a corn bait. That by berating these other forms of hunting you are only shooting yourself in the foot. You are either with us or against us.
I hope that my “vituperative rhetoric” has at least partially pried open some very tightly shut eyes on this forum.
[/QUOTE]
Art,
That was all me. IV did nothing more than cut and paste them.
Dr Rob,
Did you or did you not see the part about.....
"it will remain illegal to shoot a wolf attacking pet dogs
or hunting hounds on public land"
Rob prepared to do what? Commit a felony by DLP?
My point is simply that the federal government has us between a rock and a hard place. These laws are unjust they force us to make choices that a free man shouldn't have to make. And they were put into place without the concurrence of the local people whom are to be affected by them.
And finally I am trying to point out that there are more ways to hunt than sitting in a deer stand over a corn bait. That by berating these other forms of hunting you are only shooting yourself in the foot. You are either with us or against us.
I hope that my “vituperative rhetoric” has at least partially pried open some very tightly shut eyes on this forum.
Reintroduction of wolves= Government sponsored terrorism. Put a Canadian wolf into Southern territory where the game is smaller and its a no contest. Yes it seems to me that this thread attracted an anti-hunting response from the uninformed. And without predator pressure ie hunting by humans, wolves will become more enboldened to hunt humans, little humans, solitary humans. This is what is starting with the Grizzley. They have no fear of people eventually, and teach their young to stalk humans. Many a story in my area about this by hunters in Grizzley country. I believe we will have to prepare for possible attacks by wolves more with each coming hunting season. That along with the Grizzley issue, is enough for me, a solitary hunter, to find another area to hunt. I have no problem at this time with SSS.
H&H I did see that part.
Are crackershells (or a warning shot fired in the air) illegal in this instance?
When I took my dogs out to train them to flush birds I carried a pistol (or a blank pistol within city limits) to get them used to the sound of gunfire. Seems like that's reasonable when training bear dogs.
I'd agree (after reading up) that it sounds like the laws are not on the side of the reasonable man (hunter or otherwise) when it comes to protecting one's self or pets against wolves in Idaho.
Some kind of noisemaker bigger than a bell on a collar seems prudent doesn't it? Especially by a guy who is in the business of raising dogs and taking them into the woods to train them. That's what I mean by being prepared.
I don't see how that's remotely anti-hunting.
THIS is something I'd comepletely agree with you on (emphasis mine):
"What does bother me is that the local citizens had NO SAY in the process. That affected states do not have ANY OVERSIGHT or management tools to control wolf populations. That these wolves remain federally protected once they leave their intended reintroduction areas."
(Note that landowners, ranchers, etc. have successfully lobbied in many areas to get an exemption built into these rules ie: Yellowstone.)
"That people are not allowed to defend themselves or their property from wolves and are criminalized if they do. That the federal government has maintained draconian rules with regards to wolves and are generally acting like a bunch of oppressive leftist animal rights nazis in regards to the whole wolf program."
This is indeed another form of 'the rest of us' being treated like serfs with laws (or rules and regulations that carry the weight of law) that we did NOT have a say in passing.
Sounds to me like there are several options to "solve" this problem without eradicating all the wolves.
A.Lobby for the right to self protection of self and property in the legislature.
B. Lobby to have dogs re-classified as "livestock" (sad to say this is probably easier) protected by the same laws as cattle, sheep and horses. Of course B will cost the dog owner money in the form of fees and taxes.
C. Carry a firearm anyway if you can do so without violating the law.
of those 3 only one is effective without talking to a politician.
Are crackershells (or a warning shot fired in the air) illegal in this instance?
When I took my dogs out to train them to flush birds I carried a pistol (or a blank pistol within city limits) to get them used to the sound of gunfire. Seems like that's reasonable when training bear dogs.
I'd agree (after reading up) that it sounds like the laws are not on the side of the reasonable man (hunter or otherwise) when it comes to protecting one's self or pets against wolves in Idaho.
Some kind of noisemaker bigger than a bell on a collar seems prudent doesn't it? Especially by a guy who is in the business of raising dogs and taking them into the woods to train them. That's what I mean by being prepared.
I don't see how that's remotely anti-hunting.
THIS is something I'd comepletely agree with you on (emphasis mine):
"What does bother me is that the local citizens had NO SAY in the process. That affected states do not have ANY OVERSIGHT or management tools to control wolf populations. That these wolves remain federally protected once they leave their intended reintroduction areas."
(Note that landowners, ranchers, etc. have successfully lobbied in many areas to get an exemption built into these rules ie: Yellowstone.)
"That people are not allowed to defend themselves or their property from wolves and are criminalized if they do. That the federal government has maintained draconian rules with regards to wolves and are generally acting like a bunch of oppressive leftist animal rights nazis in regards to the whole wolf program."
This is indeed another form of 'the rest of us' being treated like serfs with laws (or rules and regulations that carry the weight of law) that we did NOT have a say in passing.
Sounds to me like there are several options to "solve" this problem without eradicating all the wolves.
A.Lobby for the right to self protection of self and property in the legislature.
B. Lobby to have dogs re-classified as "livestock" (sad to say this is probably easier) protected by the same laws as cattle, sheep and horses. Of course B will cost the dog owner money in the form of fees and taxes.
C. Carry a firearm anyway if you can do so without violating the law.
of those 3 only one is effective without talking to a politician.
H&H
I thought your post was great,the rhetoric didn't bother me.Some of the posts had my jaws getting tight also.Hunting with hounds is a great sport,but it takes more time and commitment than most are willing to give.My Dad was a coon and cat hunter,but mostly a fox hunter.The hunt was about the fox race,but most hunters don't know about anything like this.I don't like feed bucket deer either,but that seems to be what most deer hunting is now.Some one needed to tell these wannabes a few things,and your rhetoric is better than mine.
I thought your post was great,the rhetoric didn't bother me.Some of the posts had my jaws getting tight also.Hunting with hounds is a great sport,but it takes more time and commitment than most are willing to give.My Dad was a coon and cat hunter,but mostly a fox hunter.The hunt was about the fox race,but most hunters don't know about anything like this.I don't like feed bucket deer either,but that seems to be what most deer hunting is now.Some one needed to tell these wannabes a few things,and your rhetoric is better than mine.
- Status
Similar threads
