More Hounds down due to Wolves in MT.

[RG]

Sitka, we're not allowed to deal with the problem ones.  If a dog is chasing my horse, cow, sheep, etc., I'm legally allowed to shoot it.  If a wolf is chasing my cow I have to blow a whistle at it.  So which one makes me angry?  Nobody introduced a population of wild dogs that has now grown into the hundreds into my hunting, ranching, camping area.  If they did I, my neighbors, and the authorities would have the right to take action to remedy the problem.  That's the point.  There are very few people who don't believe there is at least some room someplace in the landscape for a few wolves which are managed and kept within proper balance.  When they become some kind of sacred cow that gets rubbed in the face of every one of us by a bunch of emotional folks who have no wilderness sense whatsoever then that generates anger, a lot of it.  Then when they kill a man's dogs it pushes the balance over the top again.  You would be really hard pressed to find somebody who has spent their life in the back country, thereby having first hand direct knowledge of the state of things there, who isn't angry about the wolves and their "people".  You can't read a book and then have all this stuff figured out!

[BuckNAze]

For anyone who doesnt believe his was a wolf attack I.am also friends with the 2 gentlemen who loss these 3 dogs to these wolves and were 500yds away when they heard the wolves howling after it happened. Wolf tracks everywhere. Let me know if you need more picture proof of these dogs tore up. Funny how people can still defend thr wolves after something like this and what they are doing to our wildlife in several states. How about you take your little fluffy out in the woods for a little stroll and let them get killed by a pack of wolves then state yoir opinion on them. And by that i mean a dog you raised from a puo.and put thousands of dollars into that you treat as one of the family

[turkeyfeather]

I'm sorry this young man lost his dogs. Dogs can be like family, in fact better than family.

But it's ironic to see other hunters get so emotionally wound up over wolves killing things. It's what they do, just like dogs. In fact every argument you can use against wolves, can be used against dogs. (and cats)

These wolves aren't native to this area.  Neither are cats and dogs. All introduced by humans

Wolves spread hydatid disease. Dogs spread hydatid disease, and there will always be way more dogs than wolves.

Wolves kill wild animals. Dogs and cats kill wild animals.

Wolves kill domestic animals. Dogs kill domestic animals. In fact dogs are the second largest group of sheep killers in the US, behind coyotes.  http://www.sheep101.info/predators.html  If you take the numbers here, in 2010, 247,200 sheep were killed by predators in the USA. 51.7% by coyotes, and 22.7% or 56,114 by dogs.

Wolves (very rarely) attack humans. 2 documented deaths in over 100 years in North America. Dogs attack humans on a regular basis including an average of 26 deaths per year since 2005 just in the USA.

Let's be honest here. These numbers are obviously scewed by the population of coyotes vs. dogs vs. wolves. Sure coyotes and dogs attack and kill more taht's because the population of dogs is 100 times that of wolves, and much much more than coyotes. You actually argued against yourself here. If coyotes are the #1 killer and they grossly outnumber wolves how do you think those numbers will change when a wolf population starts to catch up. You don't need to be a biologist to figure that out. And as had been said you cannot compare a cat to a wolf(apples to orange) totally different personalities.

[Fishaholic]

i heard they put the wrong wolf in MT. the Canada timber wolf insead of a plains wolf not sure if uts the truth or not i think a  timber wolf is bigger then a plains wolfs. Not sure though has anyone else hear this? or know  if it is true

[Northway]

Wolves will never catch up to coyotes. Coyotes have to be one of the most adaptive mammals on the face of the earth. Unbelievably, coyotes even find their way into Central Park in Manhattan!

I'm sure you already realize that, but wolves aren't even a part of the discussion about adaptivity when you're talking about yotes.

I've read about Wildlife Service agents from the 60's & 70's stating the combined pressure of poison, trapping, & aerial shooting during winter could only put a short term dent in coyote numbers locally. Agents would swear they absolutely wiped out the coyote population in a given area when given the opportunity through aerial shooting after a heavy snowfall, only to have ranchers complaining just as much the following summer. 

[turkeyfeather]

Wolves will never catch up to coyotes. Coyotes have to be one of the most adaptive mammals on the face of the earth. Unbelievably, coyotes even find their way into Central Park in Manhattan!

I'm sure you already realize that, but wolves aren't even a part of the discussion about adaptivity when you're talking about yotes.

I've read about Wildlife Service agents from the 60's & 70's stating the combined pressure of poison, trapping, & aerial shooting during winter could only put a short term dent in coyote numbers locally. Agents would swear they absolutely wiped out the coyote population in a given area when given the opportunity through aerial shooting after a heavy snowfall, only to have ranchers complaining just as much the following summer. 

You missed my point. It was that of course yotes and dogs kill more they is a much much bigger population of them. That's just plain common sense.

[Northway]

Wolves will never catch up to coyotes. Coyotes have to be one of the most adaptive mammals on the face of the earth. Unbelievably, coyotes even find their way into Central Park in Manhattan!

I'm sure you already realize that, but wolves aren't even a part of the discussion about adaptivity when you're talking about yotes.

I've read about Wildlife Service agents from the 60's & 70's stating the combined pressure of poison, trapping, & aerial shooting during winter could only put a short term dent in coyote numbers locally. Agents would swear they absolutely wiped out the coyote population in a given area when given the opportunity through aerial shooting after a heavy snowfall, only to have ranchers complaining just as much the following summer. 

You missed my point. It was that of course yotes and dogs kill more they is a much much bigger population of them. That's just plain common sense.

True. Multiple factors make comparisons between domestic dogs, wolves, and yotes difficult.

[Special T]

But you can stack coyotes and rouge dogs like cord wood.

[WAcoyotehunter]

But you can stack coyotes and rouge dogs like cord wood.

That's one of the primary differences...

[Special T]

The only one i'm concerned with currently...

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Let's be honest here. These numbers are obviously scewed by the population of coyotes vs. dogs vs. wolves. Sure coyotes and dogs attack and kill more taht's because the population of dogs is 100 times that of wolves, and much much more than coyotes. You actually argued against yourself here. If coyotes are the #1 killer and they grossly outnumber wolves how do you think those numbers will change when a wolf population starts to catch up.

Let's be honest again, wolves will never catch up, for numerous reasons. The number one being they are very territorial and will and do kill each other. Wolves are one of the biggest killers of wolves. Also wolves have to survive by putting their lives on the line. Many are crippled and killed by prey animals. They don't live an easy life. Not many die of old age. Dogs on the other hand are pampered and fed and given shelter. Not many have to fight for their lives. Most live to old age if they learn to stay off the roads.

But consider this, hunters and gun owners (rightly so) get their hackles up at gun control fanatics who use tragedies like Sandy Hook to whip up emotional fervor for more stringent gun control. Hunters and gun owners (rightly so) argue that the bad guys should be held responsible for their actions, not all gun owners.  Gun owners feel (rightly so) that these tragedies shouldn't be emotionalized to bring down legislation against law abiding gun owners.

But then hunters turn around and do the same thing in the wolf debate. They takes stories like this and make emotional arguments about wolves. Every little bad action by a wolf or suspected bad action, or completely made up bad action is blamed on all wolves. Just like there are gun control fanatics who pretend they only want reasonable limitations and bans, when we all know their goal is to end gun ownership, there are hunters who pretend they want reasonable controls on wolves, when really, they want to get rid of them all. Those are the fringe people on both sides of the gun and wolf argument. It's up to the folks in the middle to maintain good sense and come up with reasonable solutions in both cases and not let the lunatics define the problems and solutions. It's easy to get caught up in emotionalism and much harder to look at an emotional situation and remain thoughtful and logical.

I know it's not the popular view here, but I'm just being consistent in my views. It's wrong to let tragedies be used to force emotional solutions. Period.

[cougarbart]

how honestly can you say wolves won't become as previliant as coyotes?  we have no idea how they will adapt and  learn to survive in  their surroundings!  One thing i can say about any animal is they do adapt and learn how to survive,  I read a wolf study were a pack traveled 11 miles to cows that were a food source!  if they find a food source in issaquah or bellvue would they be able to travel back to a safety of timber!lol 

[turkeyfeather]

Let's be honest here. These numbers are obviously scewed by the population of coyotes vs. dogs vs. wolves. Sure coyotes and dogs attack and kill more taht's because the population of dogs is 100 times that of wolves, and much much more than coyotes. You actually argued against yourself here. If coyotes are the #1 killer and they grossly outnumber wolves how do you think those numbers will change when a wolf population starts to catch up.

Let's be honest again, wolves will never catch up, for numerous reasons. The number one being they are very territorial and will and do kill each other. Wolves are one of the biggest killers of wolves. Also wolves have to survive by putting their lives on the line. Many are crippled and killed by prey animals. They don't live an easy life. Not many die of old age. Dogs on the other hand are pampered and fed and given shelter. Not many have to fight for their lives. Most live to old age if they learn to stay off the roads.

But consider this, hunters and gun owners (rightly so) get their hackles up at gun control fanatics who use tragedies like Sandy Hook to whip up emotional fervor for more stringent gun control. Hunters and gun owners (rightly so) argue that the bad guys should be held responsible for their actions, not all gun owners.  Gun owners feel (rightly so) that these tragedies shouldn't be emotionalized to bring down legislation against law abiding gun owners.

But then hunters turn around and do the same thing in the wolf debate. They takes stories like this and make emotional arguments about wolves. Every little bad action by a wolf or suspected bad action, or completely made up bad action is blamed on all wolves. Just like there are gun control fanatics who pretend they only want reasonable limitations and bans, when we all know their goal is to end gun ownership, there are hunters who pretend they want reasonable controls on wolves, when really, they want to get rid of them all. Those are the fringe people on both sides of the gun and wolf argument. It's up to the folks in the middle to maintain good sense and come up with reasonable solutions in both cases and not let the lunatics define the problems and solutions. It's easy to get caught up in emotionalism and much harder to look at an emotional situation and remain thoughtful and logical.

I know it's iew here, but I'm just being consistent in my views. It's wrong to let tragedies be used to force emotional solutions. Period.

I agree to a point. But here's the problem. 1st off, you just agreed with the point I was making. Wolves are nowhere near the population that other K-9 animals are. Nobody is disputing that. Thank god, could you imagine the chaos and damage they would do if they were. 2nd, show me a story where a wolf or pack was wrongly accused of any wrong doing. (good luck). And finally, I and I am willing to bet alot of other hunters don't have a problem with wolf re-introduction. I actually happen to think it's a good thing. The problem is that wolves were cramed down hunters throats with no say or recourse. We then have to accept higher licensing and tag fees to go hunt a smaller more dispersed population of ungulates because of the wolves. And again when we complain the tree huggers on the coast that drive their pink Priuses rally gather their money and "convince" WDFW to ignore it. When there does become a problem that WDFW has to take care of it's the sportsman fault. So yeah I have a little bit of a problem with wolves and the way they are being managed.

[Special T]

I would say that wolves are the symptom of a bigger problem. The ESA does not really do what it was intended to. THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN WOLVES IN WA, THEY NEVER LEFT! The real problem is that the ESA is a weapon used by lawyers that wrap themselves in a "Non-Profit" and procedd to sue for the  Gov for "damages"  and sportmen are shook down in multipal ways. Our P&R funds are used to pay these BS "damages", Used for "experimental" reintroductions that are then considered native, and to top it all off we are told we are bad and need to pay more for our fair share!    There shouldn't be much wonder why sprotsmen are not excited about wolves...

Do you like it when someone crams something down your throat and told to like it? Most people don't...

[turkeyfeather]

Are you trying to argue a point against mine, cause sounds to me like you agree.