Now this is good news, 188 wolves killed

onpoint

Active member
http://www.outdoornews.com/articles...xt?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook

Idaho reports hunters killed 188 wolves

Published:
Tuesday, April 13, 2010 8:07 PM CDT
Boise, Idaho (AP) - Idaho wildlife officials say hunters killed 188 wolves during the state's seven-month regulated public hunting season.

That total is short of the 220-wolf quota set before the season got under way in early September.

The season was extended in December before closing last Wednesday.

Overall, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game sold 31,400 wolf hunting tags, with most of those going to in-state hunters. Agency data collected from the hunt shows 86 percent of the wolves killed during the hunt were taken by resident hunters.

Records also show October was the busiest month for hunters bagging wolves, while January was the most difficult.

State officials are praising the hunt for helping stabilize growth of wolves. At the end of 2009, biologists estimated Idaho had more than 800 wolves in 94 packs.
 
should have been 1880 killed, its to late to save big game hunting in Idaho, bugle your elk and get 2 packs of wolves instead, my kids will never get to hunt big game, there wont be any in a few years.
 
wolves

same thing in wyoming really getting bad. had several close encounters this year in wyoming while elk hunting around the dubois. ranchers are not happy:eek:
 
Last edited:
I know the wolves have cleaned out a large portion of the moose and elk in Yellowstone. Has to be one of the dumbest things the government ever did by trying to re-establish wolves in that area. A few years ago there was a collared wolf killed on I80 west of Denver. He had been collared in the Yellowstone area.
 
Minnesota too. Including one of my female shorthairs. He didn't kill her but would have had we not got to her. She had tooth marks in her hind quarters.

Killed my buddy's lab and two other dogs in his neighborhood in South Range Wis. His nieghbor watched it kill their dofg on the chain in the middle of the day. She knew nothing about how to use a gun and felt she couldn't stop the wolf. She called for holp but he killed the dog and took part of it before help could arrive.

I have all kinds of links on wolves that have killed dogs, threatened hunters and even killed a man in Canada and women in Canada or Alasks(can't remember). Wolves will take anything they can and do.
 
http://www.subletteexaminer.com/v2_news_articles.php?heading=0&story_id=1319&page=72

Gros Ventre wolves kill 3 dogs
Posted: Monday, Nov 23rd, 2009
BY: Joy Ufford



Friday the 13th of November was a bad day for lion-hunting guide Scott Leeper, of Bondurant, and three of his oldest and best hounds, killed within minutes and a half-mile apart by two groups of wolves along the Upper Gros Ventre River.

Leeper, with decades of backcountry experience, was riding horseback with his “outfitter bosses” and a mountain-lion hunter when they set out at daylight in the Slate Creek drainage of the Upper Gros Ventre.

He turned out his old-timers – all small wiry dogs: a little white hound named Candy, the spotted Popcorn and “Buddy the blue tick” – following their progress with a GPS device that tracks the dogs, which wear collars with short

antennae.

“These dogs had been on a track, trailing for about an hour,” Leeper said, explaining the hounds travel together, baying and barking, when they cross and follow a lion scent. They were about a mile and a half ahead of the hunting group.

Suddenly, an icon popped up on his GPS screen that showed Candy had stopped moving – and as they came within sight of her, wolves begin howling. They rode as quickly as they could and found Candy lying there, disemboweled and dead.

From following the tracks, they could see where Candy was separated from the other two and chased by the wolves before they dragged her down and gutted her, eating her heart, he said.

Leeper stayed with her body while the outfitters and hunter rode to track the other two hounds, Buddy and Popcorn, whose signals were briefly blocked by a hill. When the outfitters and hunters got closer to the spot where the hounds were, they watched and counted 16 wolves, 11 of them black, stream up the hill and out of sight.

“The (hunters) went a half-mile and by the time those guys got there, those other two dogs were dead,” he said. “They died within 50 yards of each other. … There were blood trails up and down the hill where Popcorn was dragged.”

Leeper decided he had to leave the bloody, torn bodies behind because bringing them out on horseback wasn’t feasible.

“Candy, she was my girlfriend,” he said last weekend.

The outfitters, who own a hunting camp nearby, have seen their share of wolves fill the Gros Ventre and move into Hoback Basin. They were “both shocked” at the dogs’ brutal deaths and the number of wolves running in that group.

Leeper’s GPS dog-tracking system

allows him to basically see or even follow in their footsteps exactly where his hounds were that morning, he said. He and his companions have extensive tracking experience as well, so they decided to see if the same small group of wolves could have killed Candy and then somehow gotten ahead to Buddy and Popcorn.

What they found were tracks of five or six wolves that had overtaken Candy and after killing her the group continued straight north, leaving the other two dogs.

What the hunting party found when they retraced the path of the 16 wolves that killed Buddy and Popcorn, though, gave them pause.

The large pack had been on the south side of the Gros Ventre and traveled about four miles to a bridge over the river near Goosewing Ranch, crossing the bridge apparently to avoid getting into the water, then ran straight up the other side of the river, heading north again about four miles to run at and kill the other two hounds.

“They were clear on the other side of the river doing their wolf thing and came clear down there because these dogs were barking,” Leeper said.

He imagines the big pack heard his dogs baying – but seeing the “freeway” of wolf tracks crossing the bridge and moving

toward two noisy but small dogs was frightening.

“This is going to be your dog, I guarantee it,” he predicted to hikers, campers, horseback riders or anyone with pets or cow dogs along.

He also believes if the wolves were that intent on getting to his dogs, if the hunting party had been with the dogs there would have been further

injuries.

“I think the horses would have been bitten, and if people had been on the ground trying to stop this they would have been attacked,” he said. “There’s not anything anybody can do to stop them.”

Leeper also said he wouldn’t be surprised if there are many more wolves in the Upper Gros Ventre that federal officials don’t know about, along with uncounted wildlife and livestock deaths of elk, moose, cattle and deer wherever wolves run thick.

Eventually, he thinks a massive overflow of wolves and wildlife decimation will spill into Sublette and Fremont counties, both accessible from major wolf strongholds.

And he questions whether or not, with wolves back under the protection of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and not Wyoming Game and Fish (G&F) management, they can be accurately monitored or controlled.



FWS numbers

Mike Jimenez, head of the FWS’ Wyoming wolf program (and briefly when wolves were delisted, G&F state wolf manager), said Monday G&F had reported the dog killings to him.

“It’s traumatic,” he said, adding he grew up with “black and tan” hounds. “I can totally sympathize with that.”

Unfortunately, people on public lands cannot shoot wolves to defend their dogs as they can with livestock, he said.

Jimenez said the territory the hunters were in Nov. 13 belongs to the Buffalo Pack, which dens in the corner of Yellowstone and in winter ranges to the Gros Ventre.

Although the FWS 2008 annual wolf report stated that pack had seven adults and two pups in December 2008, apparently this year two Buffalo females had litters totaling 12 to 15 pups, according to Jimenez.

He estimates there are now 17 to 20 wolves in the Buffalo Pack at this time; winter counts will be done next month.

“It’s unusual, not unheard of, but unusual, to have a double litter,” he added.

As to whether there were two separate dog-killing packs near the river on

Nov. 13, Jimenez hazarded a couple theories. One is that some wolves might be splitting off from the main Buffalo Pack to start their own.

“My guess is it’s all the same pack,” he said. “A pack that big doesn’t all hang out together.”

Jimenez also provided a “preliminary” estimate of Wyoming’s overall wolf status outside Yellowstone with at least 29 or 30 packs, 19 to 20 breeding pairs and 180 to 200 wolves.

In December 2008, the report listed (outside Yellowstone) at least 19 packs with a minimum of 178 wolves and 16 breeding pairs.

Jimenez said after trapping “a gazillion wolves” he can say the average male adult weighs 100 to 105 pounds, an adult female is about 10 pounds lighter and a healthy pup born in the year weighs 70 to 80 pounds.

Lion hounds and guard dogs unfortunately fall prey to territorial wolves, he said. While numbers of dogs killed vary by year and state, he said hunting dogs tend to be running off a ways from their owners as opposed to a cowdog or pet with a hiker.

“Wolves respond (to dogs) in the same way as they do to an unfamiliar pack,” he said.

Thus far in Wyoming for 2009, three guard dogs protecting sheep and one pet (near Cody) were reported killed before this most recent incident. Jimenez said he was unaware of previous years’ reports of the Daniel Pack killing four cow dogs on Cottonwood Creek, as reported in the

Examiner.

Should hikers, campers, bikers or horseback riders use caution when traveling with their dogs in these lupine strongholds?

Jimenez said he doesn’t think there should be a great concern.

“But you should probably be aware of it, if you’re with a dog,” he said.



Manage wolves

Gros Ventre outfitter and rancher Brian Taylor’s family bought the Falers’ hunting camp at the head of the river in 1952 and has had three generations of cattle ranching by Lower Slide Lake.

Taylor is outspoken about what he sees happening on the Gros Ventre with wolves back in the mix. He wants to organize a field trip into the head of the Gros Ventre to show people what the reality is like when wolves aren’t managed.

“At a very, very conservative guess there’s 20 and probably closer to 30 wolves in the Gros Ventre,” he said Monday.

Leeper’s dogs were victims and there are plenty of others, according to Taylor – the mountainous region’s wildlife. This fall, he and his father and a hunting guide did not see a single young spike elk in Hunt Area 82, he said. He also believes the moose population is being decimated by wolves and fears the day will come when seeing a moose is a rarity.

FWS needs to manage these wolves or hand management back to the state before wildlife populations are damaged beyond a tipping point, Taylor stated.

“They (G&F) can’t manage anything else if they can’t manage the wolves,” he said.



For the complete article see the 11-24-2009 issue.

___________________________________

Ontario man killed in wolf attack, coroner's jury finds
First documented case in North America of a healthy wolf killing a human in the wild
Last Updated: Thursday, November 1, 2007 | 4:03 PM CT
CBC News
A coroner's jury in Saskatchewan has determined that Ontario university student Kenton Carnegie was killed in a wolf attack.

Carnegie was 22 when he died in November 2005 near Points North Landing, Sask. On a work term for a company at the mining exploration camp, located about 750 kilometres northeast of Saskatoon, Carnegie went for a walk and didn't come back.

Searchers later found his body surrounded by wolves.

Witnesses told the inquest that wild animals had been feeding at an unregulated garbage dump. Concerns were expressed that wolves in the area had lost their natural fear of humans.

Paul Paquet, an expert on wolf biology who studied the case for the coroner's office, told the inquest earlier in the week that it was more likely that a black bear killed Carnegie, although a wolf attack was also a possibility.

He said he based his findings on all the evidence, including the way the body had been consumed and moved around.

But his evidence didn't jibe with what people on the scene observed. No one reported seeing a bear in the area.

Another wolf expert, Mark McNay, who had studied the case for Carnegie's family, told the jury he was convinced it was a wolf attack.

The jury's finding is significant, because there are no documented cases in North America of a healthy wolf killing a human in the wild.

The jury made a series of recommendations on how to prevent similar incidents. Among them is a requirement for the Saskatchewan Environment Department to provide proper fencing and supervision at all landfills where there are known to be wildlife feeding.


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2007/11/01/wolf-verdict.html#ixzz0llmysxna

_________________________________

http://www.myphl17.com/la-na-wolf-attack13-2010mar13,0,4716005.story

Wolves kill teacher in Alaska
Villagers in Chignik Lake on the Alaska Peninsula take precautions after the first known fatal wolf attack in U.S. in modern times.
By Kim Murphy
March 13, 2010


Candice Berner was attacked while jogging and listening to her iPod Monday evening. (March 11, 2010)
Reporting from Seattle - Hunters were combing the snowy brush around Chignik Lake, Alaska, on Friday in an attempt to hunt down up to four wolves that killed a 32-year-old special education teacher in the first known fatal wolf attack in the U.S. in modern times.

But the wolves were elusive, and villagers were hoping that state game officials would send in a helicopter to help track the animals, Village Council President Johnny Lind said.

"They've been looking and scouting around, and the wolves are definitely still around, but they're smart, and they take off before you can get close to them," Lind said.

Candice Berner, a special education teacher who traveled among several rural schools on the Alaska Peninsula, 475 miles southwest of Anchorage, was attacked while jogging and listening to her iPod Monday evening on the deserted, 3-mile-long road that leads out from the village to its small airstrip.

A native of Slippery Rock, Pa., she had been working in Alaska only since August. Her body was found by snowmobilers a short time after the attack. It had been dragged off the road and partially eaten, and was surrounded by wolf prints.

"Our investigation points to wolves being the most likely culprit. It is the only predatory animal that is active in the area that we're aware of, and we also believe the wolves have been increasingly threatening to people in the area," said Megan Peters, spokeswoman for the Alaska State Troopers. "They've been getting too close, circling, making people fearful for their safety."

Christi Aleck, another resident of the village, said that while there are always wolves in the area, three to four have been lingering unusually close over the past week or so and have been sighted again since the attack.

"They come in at nighttime, not very far from the village, and they're just kind of watching," she said. "They're waiting for somebody else to go out again, I guess."

She said villagers are driving their children to school and keeping them indoors during recess.

"People are scared. Oh yeah, they're scared," she said. "Nobody's walking around anywhere. I mean, wolves have always hung around in the wintertime, but they've never attacked anyone."

The only known previous fatal wolf attack in North America over the last 100 years occurred in 2005, when a young geology student was attacked and partially eaten by a pack of wolves in northern Saskatchewan.

In at least two other cases, there were attacks -- in Alaska and again in Saskatchewan -- that were halted by rescuers before they became fatal.

"What the research shows is that in the last 10 or 20 years, as wolves have kind of re-colonized areas where they were extirpated around the turn of the 20th century, and as people have also developed more habits of going out into national parks and wilderness areas, we've had more aggressive encounters," said Mark McNay, a retired Alaskan wildlife biologist who has studied wolf attacks.

Wildlife attacks in Alaska are relatively common. "Certainly we have bear maulings, we have people bitten by wolves, we have people that are stomped by moose," Peters said. "Having an incident where a human and animal cross paths and it doesn't end well, that's normal. But we don't have any other case on hand that we're aware of where someone was actually killed by a wolf."

Peters said state troopers had ruled out the possibility that Berner had died from any other cause and was later dragged away by wolves.

__________________________________
http://www.hotspotoutdoors.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1976555/1

Yesterday evening, my 16 yr old son was brush hogging some of our trails. He was out in our ~12 acre field when 2 timberwolves attacked and fatally wounded our best friend, our dog Cara. My son was about 150 yds from them when it happened and the wolves weren't bothered by his presence. He called up to the house on his cell phone and I immediately went out there to find the wolves standing over my Yellow Lab. I chased them off with the truck and came back to check on the dog and go tell my wife the sad news. She was on her way out to the field so I turned around and the wolves were already on there way back to my dog. Our dog suffered a terrible abdomen wound with her insides hanging out.We took her to the vet but she was missing a big piece of her stomach muscle. They were unable to perform surgery and had to be put to sleep. Our dog was just like one of our kids and it has been a very hard day for me, my wife and four kids.

___________________________________

Those should get your blood boiling. Kill'em all!!!
 
Where we go ATV riding there are so many wolf tracks that is insane, hundreds everywhere, cant even let my kids fish in the creek by themselves, there has been 2 packs spotted just 3 miles from my house, i have decided the best way to wage war on them is with my PVS 14 and supressed AR. They arent the only ones that can hunt the night. One of the reasons i got back into bird hunting is that i dont want my kids to get into big game hunting just to have it dissapear.
 
My family is from Bozeman and fortunately I was able to experience the elk hunting in the Gallatin while it was still good. Now there are wolves everywhere and it makes me sick to know that the elk heards have been reduced to next to nothing. Three years ago we were up there archery hunting and instead of seeing typical rut behavior, these heards were running scared, rarely bedding down, and hardly bugling because of the threat of wolves and Griz. While I understand the importance of keeping keystone species, it is impossible to re-introduce the ultimate predator to a confined habitat (Yellowstone/Grand Teton) without fierce management. I feel for the ranchers and outfitters.
 
Nice threat for the anti's here guys. Lots of ammo....

I agree that the wolves need to go as most of the guys on this site do. However, I certainly agree w/ tmrichardson that this kind of talk coming from the outdoorsmen is ammo for the anti-hunting groups out there. Please do us all a favor and refrain from using statements like "Kill em' all." I wouldn't lose any sleep over all of them getting killed, but we'd be doing ourselves and our future generations a favor to consider the kind of language we're using to describe our feelings on eliminating a species.

Fellow members and outdoorsmen and women everywhere; PLEASE don't take offense to my comments. If you really think about it, we can say all of these things using different words and phrases and it doesn't sound quite so bad to the anti's. When some folks read some of these statements, they perceive us as monsters and we don't want that. First, we're monsters b/c we want to eradicate all of the wolves. Next, it is much easier for the anti's to persuade someone that is on the fence about the harvesting of other species. We must remember that our words and actions will have an impact on future generations as they try to keep our traditions alive.
 
Very well put KB. I agree that the wolves are a big threat and need to be controlled, but we do have to be careful on how we say things. It's unfortunate, but anymore with the internet, anyone can see what we write. People can also take bits and pieces and show it to whomever they want. I have seen this happen to get rules changed in college. It's not neccesarily right, but people do use it like that. I wish we could have a civil discussion to prove our side, but I think everyone can agree that will never be able to happen.
 
Well, I can see your point but playing into the anti's hangs will do nothing to change their opinion of us. All the political correct crap in the world does nothing. Hunting shows with WARNINGS before the show. Saying that the show depicts hunting situations and some views may be offended. Not showing kill shots. Telling you to hide your animal when transporting so not to offend others. I'm a hunter, a gun owner and proud of it. I'm not going to hide in shame or support the ideas of those who attack my tradition and values. Wolves were removed from nature because they have no limit. They can breed and kill until only they roam our fields and woods. Their only predator is man and that is being removed from the equation for the most part, because of ill informed people who are doing more damage then any of Gods natural disasters.

Billions of dollars have been raised by hunters in the last 100 or more years, to raise huntable populations of game. In a few short years. The ideas of these ill informed wolf lovers have set hunters efforts back a that same 100 years.

As our ancestors believed and I believe today. Remove them all. We can manage our herds of wild game by ourselves. We no longer need them as a management tool. They say the wolves only kill the sick and the weak. I live in wolf country and the only reason their are sick and week. They ham-stringed the game animal a week earlier and followed it waiting for it to become slow enough to be a easy target for a meal. Wolves kill for sport when killin is easy. A proven fact in Minnesota the winter of 1996. When wolves run deer into plowed log landings in the north. Then killed deer after deer as they tried to leave. Leaving many deer to rot in the spring. Never touched..killed for sport.

Onpoint
 
Last edited:
ding ding ding you hit the nail on the head 100% onpoint the antis can kiss my american backside if they think they will tell me what i can and cant do the reason we hunt is to put food on the table becouse unlike them we know its not grown in the store:cheers:
 
Antis are anti no matter what, caving to them will get you nowhere fast, wolves kill for sport and that has been documented beyond dought, sheep seem to get the worst of it here and in Montana, the local store here is often filled with customers buying their first rifle just to protect their pets in their own yard from wolves, people from Victor and Driggs see wolves most every day and usually looking at the easy meal like a familly pet, wolves have done nothing but divide people and decimate the big game and livestock populations. The Fed seems to have forgotton about paying the ranchers for the damage as well. I did not hunt wolves this year but now that they are basicly in the neighborhood i might. Just remember the anti hunting-gun crowd would rather see you and your familly dead than kill any animal, compromise is a dead end.
 
We're not calling for a "compromise" here guys. In fact, I'd be one to pop off and say I'd rather shoot the people that are anti-hunting than to ever give up our hunting rights. Nowhere in my post did I discuss compromising so please don't change the meaning of my comments. I've been to college myself and I've seen first hand the views of the anti's. There are plenty of people standing up on our side of the fence as well. HOWEVER, there are those people who don't necessarily have their minds made up. Do you want to run them off with your comments about kiss my @$$ and whatever else? If you want intelligent people out there speaking on our behalf, don't make them think they're taking sides with a bunch of disresepctful heathens. TRUST ME, I FEEL THE EXACT SAME WAY YOU DO!!! I just ain't gonna say it the way you do.

If a college student wants to write a paper on the psychology of why humans hunt or something, and they just so happen to be anti already, they can come to the internet and find some of the types of comments I'm referring to and share them with people that may have otherwise been persuaded into our way of thinking.

Just consider having never been introduced to hunting or fishing. Then, during your voting years you question the morality of such a tradition and start doing some research on your own. You find a site where guys introduce themselves and say something like "Hello fellow pheasants murderers" or "man, it was like the holocaust out there this w/e" and all the sudden you decide you don't want to be associated with said group of people. At which point you could say, "I created another anti amidst the American voters."

Continue to stand for your rights. Just consider what it takes to persuade folks. And be conscious of how easily your comments may be distorted when other folks have the ability to copy and paste.
 
If any of you were in our hunter ed classes, one of the first things you'd be taught is how we--hunters--play out in the numbers game of the whole population.

And how that directly relates to our critical need to be savvy about what we say and do and how we behave.

There's a common misimpression being promoted here--that we can't change anti's minds so I'm gonna do what I damn well please?

PLEASE use your minds a little here.

It is not the anti's we need to influence or provide an impression for--it's the vast majority of people in the country who are not anti's--people who's support DOES waver--people whose change of mind CAN lead to restrictions on hunting. Yes we can claim our activities are legal, well managed, sustainable, and should be supported--but that doesn't mean the door is open to flaunting your choices upon others.

Wolves are a species that evoke extremes on both sides--a lot of rhetoric is expressed about them that takes a small truth and stretches it to suit a personal bias or belief that doesn't reflect reality.

I'd offer onpoint's analysis in the last post as an example. Not 'xactly true at all.
 
Last edited:
Quote
"I'd offer onpoint's analysis in the last post as an example. Not 'xactly true at all."

_________________________

Exactly what is not true?

wolfdog.jpg


wolf_killed_dog_q.jpg


Read the link below. The government introduced the Canadian Gray Wolf, fully knowing they were introducing a disease not found here. Also, read it..they kill for sport

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter176.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2439741/posts

http://www.saveelk.com/

Pictures don't lie
 
Last edited:
well tmrichardson I am a hunter education instructor and i agree we do need to teach our youth but in the areas we are talking about the majority of the students already know what the like and dont like and id say they dont like the wolves and id also say that they probly have the same views about guns and antis as there parents and the general public as a matter of fact in my last class we had a large discussion on the subject of antis and the children knew more than i would have expected about the situations bottom line is what has been said in the previouse posts the gov and antis are all for the wolves and then they make it against the law to shoot them or to control them where are our rights or views do they matter in any way does our opinions not count in a decision that will affect us
 
Back
Top