Wolf shot near Pullman! Update 11/14/2014 pg. 8

[wolfbait]

Actually the USFWS are the worst poachers on record, using illegally introduced wolves and now WDFW are following in their foot steps knowing the outcome.

[idahohuntr]

Actually, your statement is false and made with absolutely no supporting evidence. 

[wolfbait]

Actually, your statement is false and made with absolutely no supporting evidence. 

Actually once agin you don't know what you are talking about.


Court Allows Transplants – Then Orders Removal

Readers who actively opposed the FWS option to import Canadian wolves may recall the following events:
In 1994 the Farm Bureau, Audubon Society and other plaintiffs asked the Wyoming Federal District Court to halt wolf introduction because it could not legally occur where naturally occurring wolves already existed per the 10J Rule. But instead of issuing an injunction to halt the process while the arguments were presented, Judge Downes allowed FWS to go ahead and transplant Canadian wolves into Central Idaho and Yellowstone Park for three years until he issued his ruling in December of 1997.
Then after setting aside the final wolf introduction rules as unlawful, Judge Downes ordered FWS to remove all Canadian wolves and their progeny from both experimental population areas. This ruling was met with loud criticism by the wolf activists, including the state and federal wildlife agencies who apparently believed they could get by with ignoring both state and federal laws when it suited their agenda.

http://tomremington.com/2012/07/20/dna-studies-smaller-native-wolves-existed-in-northern-rockies-before-canadian-wolf-transplant/

[idahohuntr]

Perhaps you should read your own article, particularly the part where the 10th circuit appeals court reversed the wyoming district court ruling that FWS was illegal in their wolf reintroduction.

I know you hate when pesky facts get in the way of your good conspiracies 

[bearpaw]

Poachers = scumbags.  Pretty simple.  Those who want to defend poaching...go for it...just don't call yourselves hunters. 

You know I fail to recall that hunters were asked for their opinions or vote on the forced reintroduction of wolves into our present ecosystem. I kinda think that if your shooting a wolf in Wa. today for whatever reason as like submitting a late ballot. Bang! Vote recorded.

Hunters are not the only members of public who own the wildlife in Washington state...and there was not a "forced reintroduction".  It is a natural expansion of a species that is increasing in population size.

Absolutely False: Non-native wolves were released in Idaho and YNP as an experimental population (those are the words used by USFWS). We hunters had no choice in the matter.

Keep it civil guys.  This is a real problem that is effecting hunters everywher in the northwest.  Most of us are very passionate about the wolf topic (Pro or Against)....but we shouldn't be attacking each other with name calling. 

The only person that really knows what happened is the farmer that pulled the trigger.  I tend to believe that wolves have little value in our ecosystem and should be managed aggressively.  I don't begrudge the farmer for making the decision he did.  I also don't believe that this makes me any less of a hunter.  It darn sure does not make me a "Skumbag." 

I appreciate if people believe he was in the wrong....but try and put yourself in his shoes;  do you rally want a wolf around your house?  Would you tolerate it and if not what would you do about it?  Maybe run it off, maybe call the game dept. or maybe make a decision to protect your family, livestock and livelihood.  I wasn't there so I don't know what I would do.....but I can't guarantee I wouldn't have shot the wolf either.  Very situational and my guess is very stressful.  He made a decision and now he has to live with the consequences.  I personally hope he is exonerated....and this thing goes away.   To think our government would value a wolf over the safety of a human, human's livelihood, or land is sickening. 

I stand by my statement that poachers are scumbags.  This guy has not been convicted of poaching.  If he is, then he is a scumbag.  If he was protecting his family or livestock...he did good.  If the reports that he saw a wolf and chased it several miles in a vehicle and shot it are true...he poached and he is a scumbag.  I have no idea what happened so I will wait to see the evidence that is presented like everyone else.  Folks can rationalize things however they want, blatant violations of wildlife laws (e.g., killing a protected species or shooting an elk out of season) should not be tolerated by anyone who calls themselves a hunter.  There are plenty of wildlife laws I disagree with in this state; and I believe I have sound justification for why they should be repealed...that does not entitle me (or others) to violate them.

Your statement is totally off base, this person was not hunting and he never claimed to be hunting, he was protecting his property. This has zero to do with hunting or poaching, this is a totally unrelated issue to hunting.

[idahohuntr]

Poachers = scumbags.  Pretty simple.  Those who want to defend poaching...go for it...just don't call yourselves hunters. 

You know I fail to recall that hunters were asked for their opinions or vote on the forced reintroduction of wolves into our present ecosystem. I kinda think that if your shooting a wolf in Wa. today for whatever reason as like submitting a late ballot. Bang! Vote recorded.

Hunters are not the only members of public who own the wildlife in Washington state...and there was not a "forced reintroduction".  It is a natural expansion of a species that is increasing in population size.

Absolutely False: Non-native wolves were released in Idaho and YNP as an experimental population (those are the words used by USFWS). We hunters had no choice in the matter.

Keep it civil guys.  This is a real problem that is effecting hunters everywher in the northwest.  Most of us are very passionate about the wolf topic (Pro or Against)....but we shouldn't be attacking each other with name calling. 

The only person that really knows what happened is the farmer that pulled the trigger.  I tend to believe that wolves have little value in our ecosystem and should be managed aggressively.  I don't begrudge the farmer for making the decision he did.  I also don't believe that this makes me any less of a hunter.  It darn sure does not make me a "Skumbag." 

I appreciate if people believe he was in the wrong....but try and put yourself in his shoes;  do you rally want a wolf around your house?  Would you tolerate it and if not what would you do about it?  Maybe run it off, maybe call the game dept. or maybe make a decision to protect your family, livestock and livelihood.  I wasn't there so I don't know what I would do.....but I can't guarantee I wouldn't have shot the wolf either.  Very situational and my guess is very stressful.  He made a decision and now he has to live with the consequences.  I personally hope he is exonerated....and this thing goes away.   To think our government would value a wolf over the safety of a human, human's livelihood, or land is sickening. 

I stand by my statement that poachers are scumbags.  This guy has not been convicted of poaching.  If he is, then he is a scumbag.  If he was protecting his family or livestock...he did good.  If the reports that he saw a wolf and chased it several miles in a vehicle and shot it are true...he poached and he is a scumbag.  I have no idea what happened so I will wait to see the evidence that is presented like everyone else.  Folks can rationalize things however they want, blatant violations of wildlife laws (e.g., killing a protected species or shooting an elk out of season) should not be tolerated by anyone who calls themselves a hunter.  There are plenty of wildlife laws I disagree with in this state; and I believe I have sound justification for why they should be repealed...that does not entitle me (or others) to violate them.

Your statement is totally off base, this person was not hunting and he never claimed to be hunting, he was protecting his property. This has zero to do with hunting or poaching, this is a totally unrelated issue to hunting.

Bearpaw, I agree we do not yet know whether this is a poaching case or not.  The investigation will reveal the facts and this guy may or may not be charged as A POACHER!.   

I agree he was not hunting.  If he is charged and convicted of illegally killing a wolf he is a poacher.  Illegally killing wildlife is poaching...I don't know what you call it bearpaw, but illegal wildlife harvest is poaching.  You can twist it however you want.  Poaching is poaching. 

[wolfbait]

Perhaps you should read your own article, particularly the part where the 10th circuit appeals court reversed the wyoming district court ruling that FWS was illegal in their wolf reintroduction.

I know you hate when pesky facts get in the way of your good conspiracies 

Actually it was still illegal, the same crooks that brought the wolves in got to make the rules, and as we are seeing WDFW are running their wolf program after the same model as the USFWS.

The appeals court admitted that the evidence showed native irremotus wolves already existed when the larger Canadian wolves were introduced, but said FWS had the authority to determine what constituted a population. - See more at: http://www.skinnymoose.com/bbb/category/canada-hunting-news/#sthash.hney1b6V.dpuf

[300rum]

Some people like to support ranchers and farmers and feel that for the most part they are pretty good care takers.  Other's feel that "wildlife biologists" that have been raised in a 4 year institution and spoon fed voodoo biology are correct. 

I think I know which one I agree with. 

[bearpaw]

Again, this has nothing to do with hunting, absolutely nothing, this is a self defense and property rights issue. But, I suppose there will be some who try to associate this self defense case as "poaching" or "hunting".

When someone comes on your property and robs you of something is it called poaching or hunting when you act in self defense?

This is really an issue of rural citizens against big government and urban environmentalists who themselves refuse to live with wolves!

As a rural landowner who has neighbors who have had wolf attacks on their pets within a few miles of my home, I fully support the exoneration of this rancher who was simply protecting his property. As a rural resident I would gladly donate to his legal defense and I am sure many others would as well.

This wolf experiment is failing, wolves are not adaptable to most of eastern Washington, with continued attacks on livestock and pets I am not as worried about wolves over populating as I once was. This whole wolf fiasco is proving to be just that, a giant fiasco to waste millions of taxpayer money. Most of Washington is too human populated and wolves will continue to get in trouble, this is only the beginning, many more wolves will be getting themselves in trouble and will be killed by ranchers or by the WDFW employees for attacking livestock and pets or stalking humans. Or they will breed with dogs and need to be eliminated from the wild. Look at the record of WA wolves so far, wolves are obviously not fitting in, wait till there are more wolves and more problems, wolves will be getting killed on a regular basis both by authorities and by people who will not report it at all. What about the wolves that breed with dogs and don't get neutered, soon we will have a bunch of wild dogs "muts" roaming WA. I have stated this before, wolves need to be kept to national parks and wilderness areas, when they venture into human populated areas they should be shot on site, WY had it right.

[KFhunter]

There's no legal definition of "poacher" so no, he's not a poacher as there's no such thing.


Slinging a slanderous label around like "POACHER" is nothing more than an attempt to apply public pressure to WDFW to seek a conviction.  A conviction as some kind of revenge for the slaying of this harmless animal who has a right to exist; and exist anywhere it chooses regardless of human habitation or livestock.   

It's nothing more than dirty politics and public smearing of a semi-rural citizen who dared defend his property and neighborhood kids from a wolf before it could become a marauding wolf.


What's the difference between a wolf that's never preyed on livestock and one that has?  -  time and opportunity, nothing more.

[bigtex]

Poachers = scumbags.  Pretty simple.  Those who want to defend poaching...go for it...just don't call yourselves hunters. 

You know I fail to recall that hunters were asked for their opinions or vote on the forced reintroduction of wolves into our present ecosystem. I kinda think that if your shooting a wolf in Wa. today for whatever reason as like submitting a late ballot. Bang! Vote recorded.

Hunters are not the only members of public who own the wildlife in Washington state...and there was not a "forced reintroduction".  It is a natural expansion of a species that is increasing in population size.

Absolutely False: Non-native wolves were released in Idaho and YNP as an experimental population (those are the words used by USFWS). We hunters had no choice in the matter.

Keep it civil guys.  This is a real problem that is effecting hunters everywher in the northwest.  Most of us are very passionate about the wolf topic (Pro or Against)....but we shouldn't be attacking each other with name calling. 

The only person that really knows what happened is the farmer that pulled the trigger.  I tend to believe that wolves have little value in our ecosystem and should be managed aggressively.  I don't begrudge the farmer for making the decision he did.  I also don't believe that this makes me any less of a hunter.  It darn sure does not make me a "Skumbag." 

I appreciate if people believe he was in the wrong....but try and put yourself in his shoes;  do you rally want a wolf around your house?  Would you tolerate it and if not what would you do about it?  Maybe run it off, maybe call the game dept. or maybe make a decision to protect your family, livestock and livelihood.  I wasn't there so I don't know what I would do.....but I can't guarantee I wouldn't have shot the wolf either.  Very situational and my guess is very stressful.  He made a decision and now he has to live with the consequences.  I personally hope he is exonerated....and this thing goes away.   To think our government would value a wolf over the safety of a human, human's livelihood, or land is sickening. 

I stand by my statement that poachers are scumbags.  This guy has not been convicted of poaching.  If he is, then he is a scumbag.  If he was protecting his family or livestock...he did good.  If the reports that he saw a wolf and chased it several miles in a vehicle and shot it are true...he poached and he is a scumbag.  I have no idea what happened so I will wait to see the evidence that is presented like everyone else.  Folks can rationalize things however they want, blatant violations of wildlife laws (e.g., killing a protected species or shooting an elk out of season) should not be tolerated by anyone who calls themselves a hunter.  There are plenty of wildlife laws I disagree with in this state; and I believe I have sound justification for why they should be repealed...that does not entitle me (or others) to violate them.

Your statement is totally off base, this person was not hunting and he never claimed to be hunting, he was protecting his property. This has zero to do with hunting or poaching, this is a totally unrelated issue to hunting.

Can I shoot every deer and elk that walks through my yard because they might eat the rose bushes? I'm protecting my property right?

Every couple years there is someone who shoots a bear on their property screaming "self defense" in WA and it turns out the bear was simply walking through their property and the guy decided to shoot it.

Can I walk down the street and shoot someone because they might harm me?

Truth is, we don't know the 100% truth/facts about this incident. Was the wolf simply out in a field and the landowner decided to go after it? Or was the animal creeping in on livestock, people, etc?

We have a bunch of people supposedly "in the know" about the incident yet they can't even agree on similar stories.

How about we wait for the investigation to conclude and the Whitman County Prosecutor to say something (which in this case they will) before we decide if this was a life/property threat or someone who saw a wolf and went after it. 

[washelkhunter]

Hunters are not the only members of public who own the wildlife in Washington state...and there was not a "forced reintroduction".  It is a natural expansion of a species that is increasing in population size.
 

Actually hunters nor anyone else can own wildlife here in Wa. and that's a good thing. There may or may not have been a deliberate re-intro of the wolf into Wa. but we are surely being "forced" to accept it. What I find disturbing is that the word you love so much; "scumbag" isn't on the auto bleep list. Every time I read idahohuntr now i'm gonna think, scumbag.   

[jasnt]

There's no legal definition of "poacher" so no, he's not a poacher as there's no such thing.


Slinging a slanderous label around like "POACHER" is nothing more than an attempt to apply public pressure to WDFW to seek a conviction.  A conviction as some kind of revenge for the slaying of this harmless animal who has a right to exist; and exist anywhere it chooses regardless of human habitation or livestock.   

It's nothing more than dirty politics and public smearing of a semi-rural citizen who dared defend his property and neighborhood kids from a wolf before it could become a marauding wolf.


What's the difference between a wolf that's never preyed on livestock and one that has?  -  time and opportunity, nothing more.

I don't understand how any animal could be protected of human life or lively hood. Its completely ridicules. There should be no question about it. If a person or his family or his property is in danger in anyway its his right to protect it.   

[jrebel]

Poachers = scumbags.  Pretty simple.  Those who want to defend poaching...go for it...just don't call yourselves hunters. 

You know I fail to recall that hunters were asked for their opinions or vote on the forced reintroduction of wolves into our present ecosystem. I kinda think that if your shooting a wolf in Wa. today for whatever reason as like submitting a late ballot. Bang! Vote recorded.

Hunters are not the only members of public who own the wildlife in Washington state...and there was not a "forced reintroduction".  It is a natural expansion of a species that is increasing in population size.

Absolutely False: Non-native wolves were released in Idaho and YNP as an experimental population (those are the words used by USFWS). We hunters had no choice in the matter.

Keep it civil guys.  This is a real problem that is effecting hunters everywher in the northwest.  Most of us are very passionate about the wolf topic (Pro or Against)....but we shouldn't be attacking each other with name calling. 

The only person that really knows what happened is the farmer that pulled the trigger.  I tend to believe that wolves have little value in our ecosystem and should be managed aggressively.  I don't begrudge the farmer for making the decision he did.  I also don't believe that this makes me any less of a hunter.  It darn sure does not make me a "Skumbag." 

I appreciate if people believe he was in the wrong....but try and put yourself in his shoes;  do you rally want a wolf around your house?  Would you tolerate it and if not what would you do about it?  Maybe run it off, maybe call the game dept. or maybe make a decision to protect your family, livestock and livelihood.  I wasn't there so I don't know what I would do.....but I can't guarantee I wouldn't have shot the wolf either.  Very situational and my guess is very stressful.  He made a decision and now he has to live with the consequences.  I personally hope he is exonerated....and this thing goes away.   To think our government would value a wolf over the safety of a human, human's livelihood, or land is sickening. 

I stand by my statement that poachers are scumbags.  This guy has not been convicted of poaching.  If he is, then he is a scumbag.  If he was protecting his family or livestock...he did good.  If the reports that he saw a wolf and chased it several miles in a vehicle and shot it are true...he poached and he is a scumbag.  I have no idea what happened so I will wait to see the evidence that is presented like everyone else.  Folks can rationalize things however they want, blatant violations of wildlife laws (e.g., killing a protected species or shooting an elk out of season) should not be tolerated by anyone who calls themselves a hunter.  There are plenty of wildlife laws I disagree with in this state; and I believe I have sound justification for why they should be repealed...that does not entitle me (or others) to violate them.

Your statement is totally off base, this person was not hunting and he never claimed to be hunting, he was protecting his property. This has zero to do with hunting or poaching, this is a totally unrelated issue to hunting.

Can I shoot every deer and elk that walks through my yard because they might eat the rose bushes? I'm protecting my property right?

Every couple years there is someone who shoots a bear on their property screaming "self defense" in WA and it turns out the bear was simply walking through their property and the guy decided to shoot it.

Can I walk down the street and shoot someone because they might harm me?

Truth is, we don't know the 100% truth/facts about this incident. Was the wolf simply out in a field and the landowner decided to go after it? Or was the animal creeping in on livestock, people, etc?

We have a bunch of people supposedly "in the know" about the incident yet they can't even agree on similar stories.

How about we wait for the investigation to conclude and the Whitman County Prosecutor to say something (which in this case they will) before we decide if this was a life/property threat or someone who saw a wolf and went after it. 

Deer eating a rose bush....   Never seen or heard of deer eating cattle, sheep, children, cats, dogs, etc. etc. etc.  Reaching for straws and comparing apples to oranges.  Sorry, I found that statement very funny.

I agree that no one has all the fact and your right the prosecuting attorney will say something.  Unfortunately WDFW's popularity when it comes to conducting a non biased investigation has been skewed by years of mistruths and flat out lies.  When the ruling is made and the investigation is complete, there will likely be discrepancies......two sides to the story and the truth will lie somewhere in between.  I am sure all the wolf lovers and state bureaucrats will take and bend the finding to fit their agenda......regardless of guilt vs. innocence. 

[KFhunter]

Can I shoot every deer and elk that walks through my yard because they might eat the rose bushes? I'm protecting my property right?

Every couple years there is someone who shoots a bear on their property screaming "self defense" in WA and it turns out the bear was simply walking through their property and the guy decided to shoot it.

Can I walk down the street and shoot someone because they might harm me?

Truth is, we don't know the 100% truth/facts about this incident. Was the wolf simply out in a field and the landowner decided to go after it? Or was the animal creeping in on livestock, people, etc?

We have a bunch of people supposedly "in the know" about the incident yet they can't even agree on similar stories.

How about we wait for the investigation to conclude and the Whitman County Prosecutor to say something (which in this case they will) before we decide if this was a life/property threat or someone who saw a wolf and went after it. 

Deer?  Rosebush?

Is that like timber companies slaughtering bears by the 1000's because they're peeling trees?  WDFW allows that..


Every year someone is prosecuted for shooting a bear,  WDFW arm chair QB's those decisions.  They don't take into account if that person really and truly felt threatened but rather charge based on what they see at the scene, the bear corpse and totality of the circumstances.   They can't soul search and make a determination that "YA, this person thought they were going to die"  It's impossible.  So it is possible some of those people really did think they were going to die or be seriously hurt, or that the bear might seriously hurt a loved one or pet, or livestock in the near future.  WDFW doesn't and can't take that into account.  Much like the farmer that this thread is about, killing that wolf in Pullman.  What did the farmer truly feel at the time this incident took place?  Only the farmer and one's who believe him will know.   WDFW will only look at the wolf, the evidence and totality of the circumstances and like all cases arm chair QB it and choose to send the evidence forward or not - in this case they did; but that does not mean we'll ever really know what was in the heart of this farmer when he pulled the trigger on that wolf.

If I'm walking down the street and someone pulls a gun on me must I wait until they harm me? Must I wait until the bullet impacts my chest?


What we have is a bunch of people each looking through their own lens at this case, some will jump to the farmers side and some will jump to the wolf huggers side having landed on what ever side of the fence they've landed on long ago.