Recent Wolf Shooting?

[BOWHUNTER45]

Are we talking about the same wolf ? I heard of another one shot on Blewett and they said it was gut shot 

[Special T]

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/elk-hunter-run-northeast-washington-wolves/

This article sure disputes some of the more absurd allegations against wdfw regarding wolf management and their position on wolf/human interactions that I've observed on this forum.  Some folks like to portray wdfw as seeking to make an example out of some innocent fella that has a run in with a wolf...but its pretty clear wdfw believes this guy did the right thing.  It also mentioned that they are using DNA to make sure the wolf shot in pullman was definitely a wolf before they even consider recommending any sort of charges...and last but not least, their website apparently advises people to kill wolves/fight back if a wolf does indeed attack or act aggressively.     While the chance of an encounter with an aggressive wolf is extremely small, there is no doubt that WDFW enforcement staff fully support the right of individuals to defend themselves.

All of this makes those silly proclamations from Stevens county politicians seem even more silly.

I believe this to be too little too late. If i were in the Federal delisted area and defended myself i wouldn't make myself the subject of an investigation by the WDFW. To topp it off ONE instance where the WDFW gets it right does not suddenly endear themselves to me (or many others) who have had a close encounter with the Wolves.

[idahohuntr]

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/elk-hunter-run-northeast-washington-wolves/

This article sure disputes some of the more absurd allegations against wdfw regarding wolf management and their position on wolf/human interactions that I've observed on this forum.  Some folks like to portray wdfw as seeking to make an example out of some innocent fella that has a run in with a wolf...but its pretty clear wdfw believes this guy did the right thing.  It also mentioned that they are using DNA to make sure the wolf shot in pullman was definitely a wolf before they even consider recommending any sort of charges...and last but not least, their website apparently advises people to kill wolves/fight back if a wolf does indeed attack or act aggressively.     While the chance of an encounter with an aggressive wolf is extremely small, there is no doubt that WDFW enforcement staff fully support the right of individuals to defend themselves.

All of this makes those silly proclamations from Stevens county politicians seem even more silly.

I believe this to be too little too late. If i were in the Federal delisted area and defended myself i wouldn't make myself the subject of an investigation by the WDFW. To topp it off ONE instance where the WDFW gets it right does not suddenly endear themselves to me (or many others) who have had a close encounter with the Wolves.

I am unfamiliar with any legitimate or credible instance where someone defended themselves from a wolf and were mistreated by WDFW.  Perhaps you have an example I am unaware of?

[mfswallace]

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/elk-hunter-run-northeast-washington-wolves/

This article sure disputes some of the more absurd allegations against wdfw regarding wolf management and their position on wolf/human interactions that I've observed on this forum.  Some folks like to portray wdfw as seeking to make an example out of some innocent fella that has a run in with a wolf...but its pretty clear wdfw believes this guy did the right thing.  It also mentioned that they are using DNA to make sure the wolf shot in pullman was definitely a wolf before they even consider recommending any sort of charges...and last but not least, their website apparently advises people to kill wolves/fight back if a wolf does indeed attack or act aggressively.     While the chance of an encounter with an aggressive wolf is extremely small, there is no doubt that WDFW enforcement staff fully support the right of individuals to defend themselves.

All of this makes those silly proclamations from Stevens county politicians seem even more silly.

I believe this to be too little too late. If i were in the Federal delisted area and defended myself i wouldn't make myself the subject of an investigation by the WDFW. To topp it off ONE instance where the WDFW gets it right does not suddenly endear themselves to me (or many others) who have had a close encounter with the Wolves.

I am unfamiliar with any legitimate or credible instance where someone defended themselves from a wolf and were mistreated by WDFW.  Perhaps you have an example I am unaware of?

Yes ever the staunch defender of Wolves and WDFW, thanks for joining in on the first page I just won $5   

[idahohuntr]

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/elk-hunter-run-northeast-washington-wolves/

This article sure disputes some of the more absurd allegations against wdfw regarding wolf management and their position on wolf/human interactions that I've observed on this forum.  Some folks like to portray wdfw as seeking to make an example out of some innocent fella that has a run in with a wolf...but its pretty clear wdfw believes this guy did the right thing.  It also mentioned that they are using DNA to make sure the wolf shot in pullman was definitely a wolf before they even consider recommending any sort of charges...and last but not least, their website apparently advises people to kill wolves/fight back if a wolf does indeed attack or act aggressively.     While the chance of an encounter with an aggressive wolf is extremely small, there is no doubt that WDFW enforcement staff fully support the right of individuals to defend themselves.

All of this makes those silly proclamations from Stevens county politicians seem even more silly.

I believe this to be too little too late. If i were in the Federal delisted area and defended myself i wouldn't make myself the subject of an investigation by the WDFW. To topp it off ONE instance where the WDFW gets it right does not suddenly endear themselves to me (or many others) who have had a close encounter with the Wolves.

I am unfamiliar with any legitimate or credible instance where someone defended themselves from a wolf and were mistreated by WDFW.  Perhaps you have an example I am unaware of?

Yes ever the staunch defender of Wolves and WDFW, thanks for joining in on the first page I just won $5   

As usual...lacking facts the folks who whine the most turn the conversation towards me as opposed to providing something relevant to the topic. 

[KFhunter]

I can think of an instance where a guy was ridiculed online for climbing a tree because of wolves circling him in the fog and acting aggressively.

This really is the most pathetic thread I've seen here.  Good grief, some of you must be afraid of your own shadows.

[idahohuntr]

I can think of an instance where a guy was ridiculed online for climbing a tree because of wolves circling him in the fog and acting aggressively.

Could you please provide the name or online id of the wdfw employee who engaged in this ridicule you mention? Thanks.

[KFhunter]

I can think of an instance where a guy was ridiculed online for climbing a tree because of wolves circling him in the fog and acting aggressively.

Could you please provide the name or online id of the wdfw employee who engaged in this ridicule you mention? Thanks.

Best I can do is the *censored* for WDFW

You've already stated by you're own admission you do not pack a handgun while archery hunting,  you'll scurry up a tree and crap your britches.   I haven't had a close encounter, but if/when I do I will defend myself.  To do otherwise is unconscionable.

There was no threat, thus no need to defend myself.  Just seeing the wolves had me a little paranoid for the walk out at night (both times this happened was during archery elk season).  It was in 2003 and 2005, and wolves were still federally protected in Idaho.  I never made any suggestion that I would not defend myself...even with my bow at least one wolf is going to take a broadhead to the face.  However, both times, as soon as the wolf saw me it turned and ran.  Unlike you, I do not support poaching.  Period.  If I had a handgun with me at the time of those encounters it would have done no good as the wolves were gone in the blink of an eye...I would have felt a little safer in my walk out though...I was guilty of feeling irrational fear.  To suggest you could have done something to "educate" them is absurd and demonstrates your extraordinary ignorance on the topic.  One thing is clear, you sure speak a lot about wolves and how people should react to them for a guy that has 0 experience.  That is a common theme with most of the wolf whackos I know.

[idahohuntr]

Moderators...can we please nip this name calling in the behind? Thanks.

[KFhunter]

Well it is a step in a positive direction,  perhaps WDFW really does read HW.

 

[bearpaw]

An account from the hunter of what happened: http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,164173.0.html


(to whom this may concern, please do not hijack that topic too)

[Special T]

Your not required to incriminate yourself, and if you did nothing wrong in the first place why attract attention to yourself. We are innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.
Just because the I know some good people who work for the WDFW doesn't mean their bosses dont have a bone to pick.

[idahohuntr]

Your not required to incriminate yourself, and if you did nothing wrong in the first place why attract attention to yourself. We are innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.
Just because the I know some good people who work for the WDFW doesn't mean their bosses dont have a bone to pick.

Again...can you provide even one example where "wdfw bosses" set out to mistreat someone with a self defense claim?  Innocent until proven guilty extends to all people in this country... shockingly for some, it also includes the public servants so many on this forum like to trash.  So, please provide some specifics...I'm not aware of any but maybe others are?

[Special T]

I will state this differently because I think I am failing to get my point across.

If a cop comes and wants to talk to you, you do not have to respond. You certainly dont have to respond by telling him information that may or may not make you guilty of, speeding, or.....
They cop can be a good guy, his bosses can be great people. Not responding doesnt make you guilty.

It would appear from the story that the wolves ate enough of the evidence that it was impossible to ascertain the truth any way.

[mfswallace]

I will state this differently because I think I am failing to get my point across.

If a cop comes and wants to talk to you, you do not have to respond. You certainly dont have to respond by telling him information that may or may not make you guilty of, speeding, or.....
They cop can be a good guy, his bosses can be great people. Not responding doesnt make you guilty.

It would appear from the story that the wolves ate enough of the evidence that it was impossible to ascertain the truth any way.

2 things-
First you are correct you don't have to voluntarily give any info to LEO's but more than likely you will go to jail and then have to explain things in court...I've seen obstruction charges for simply not saying anything or someone else is willing to talk and since you say nothing there story is the one that is heard... 

Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like your interpreting the part about only finding a little hide and meat incorrectly... I think what was meant was that they only found a little evidence of the hunter connecting with his shot and assumed the wolf ran off     Maybe Bearpaw can add to this .....