Wolf Prints in the snow

[HuntNFish]

A buddy of mine who has a cabin up in Okanogan by loop loop pass just sent me these pics.  The wolf pack was busy this morning.  They were the closest they have ever been to his place and he heard them howling around 5am.  This pic was taken 20 yards from his cabin door.  He is 6' 10" and that's his hand for size comparison.  Big tracks. 3rd time he's had wolf tracks around his place, first time within 100 yards.  He's been staying there this week and maybe they were curious. LOL

 

[Bango skank]

Too small

[KFhunter]

Too small

Maybe, the guy is 6 foot freaking 10 inches   

His paw is probably twice the size of our more normal sized paws   

[HuntNFish]

Too small

They measured at 4 inches wide.  Not that small.

[HighlandLofts]

It must be a coyote print then just like the state says. So get the gun out and shoot them coyotes.

[Scheindogg]

It must be a coyote print then just like the state says. So get the gun out and shoot them coyotes.

I’m not trying to start anything and I get what you’re saying but I never understand when people say to shoot them because the state says it’s a yote, when the dog in question is in a WDFW recognized wolf pack area. Don’t think they would call it a yote?

[huntnphool]

It must be a coyote print then just like the state says. So get the gun out and shoot them coyotes.

I’m not trying to start anything and I get what you’re saying but I never understand when people say to shoot them because the state says it’s a yote, when the dog in question is in a WDFW recognized wolf pack area. Don’t think they would call it a yote?

 If you "get what he's saying", where is the confusion?

[skeeter 20i]

Pretty small.

[Scheindogg]

I mean- I get what he’s saying if it was a wet-side dog. But that’s not the case here.

[KFhunter]

I mean- I get what he’s saying if it was a wet-side dog. But that’s not the case here.

I don't think you do get it. 

back a few years ago on HW we were having a lot more wolf debates and discussion, part of that discussion was the fact that WDFW would refuse to declare a dead cow as having been killed by a wolf when the evidence was clear, in one instance the only tracks around the carcass was that of wolves, and the wolves were howling just a few hundred yards away yet WDFW officers still could not declare it wolf depredation, they actually had to call olympia and ask the big bosses there if they could call it a wolf kill.  It started being a running joke that anything and everything killed that calf (rabid squirrel, badger, coyote...)   To add to the running joke one HW poster said he'd seen a wolf and called WDFW, they told him that there's no wolves in the area.....

Hunter calls WDFW

Hunter: "So if there's no wolves in the area they must in fact be coyotes so I'll shoot them"

WDFW:  "whoa wait, it's illegal to shoot wolves"

Hunter: " you just said there's no wolves in the area, so how could I get in trouble for shooting coyotes?"

So the joke is that it must just be large coyotes, and we can shoot them.   It's just another take on SSS

Still illegal weither WDFW say's there's wolves there or not.

 make since?

[Scheindogg]

I mean- I get what he’s saying if it was a wet-side dog. But that’s not the case here.

I don't think you do get it. 

back a few years ago on HW we were having a lot more wolf debates and discussion, part of that discussion was the fact that WDFW would refuse to declare a dead cow as having been killed by a wolf when the evidence was clear, in one instance the only tracks around the carcass was that of wolves, and the wolves were howling just a few hundred yards away yet WDFW officers still could not declare it wolf depredation, they actually had to call olympia and ask the big bosses there if they could call it a wolf kill.  It started being a running joke that anything and everything killed that calf (rabid squirrel, badger, coyote...)   To add to the running joke one HW poster said he'd seen a wolf and called WDFW, they told him that there's no wolves in the area.....

Hunter calls WDFW

Hunter: "So if there's no wolves in the area they must in fact be coyotes so I'll shoot them"

WDFW:  "whoa wait, it's illegal to shoot wolves"

Hunter: " you just said there's no wolves in the area, so how could I get in trouble for shooting coyotes?"

So the joke is that it must just be large coyotes, and we can shoot them.   It's just another take on SSS

Still illegal weither WDFW say's there's wolves there or not.

 make since?

Ohhhhhhhh I see. Didn’t realize it was a running joke of a few years, with those particular instances fueling the fire. I’ve read it a few times and now I undertsand. My bad!

I respect it 100%

[Tiger1358]

Meeh, I don't know about that. Doesn't look big enough for a wolf or the wolf is pretty small.
Just not something you can look at and confidently tell it's a wolf...

[KFhunter]

Meeh, I don't know about that. Doesn't look big enough for a wolf or the wolf is pretty small.
Just not something you can look at and confidently tell it's a wolf...

The dude is 6'10" according to the OP.   I'd bet he's got a pretty big hand making that track look smaller than it really is. 

not only that he's sort of "long arming" the pic, his hand isn't in the snow but held slightly above the snow, skewing perspective. 


so big hand + long arm effect = smaller looking track in the pic

[Ridgeratt]

KF I'm sure you could produce a few more and not be considered thread jackin.

[KFhunter]

 

the question isn't: "where are the wolves?"   but  "where aren't the wolves"


I get more excited not seeing wolf tracks than seeing them, maybe I should take pics of untracked snow 

[Southpole]

The dude has honkin’ meat hooks for hands, looks like wolf track. Next time use a 3 year olds child’s hand for comparison 

[spoonman]

Most yote tracks are 2" or less wide, wolves on the other hand are between 3-5" wide. So by the looks of the giant dudes hands it's a wolf.

[HighlandLofts]

Cant be wolf tracks, the state says there are none there, they are just large coyotes, so shoot as many as you can and dispose of them discreetly.

[jackelope]

Cant be wolf tracks, the state says there are none there, they are just large coyotes, so shoot as many as you can and dispose of them discreetly.

Inaccurate information

[JimmyHoffa]

Tracks tend to look bigger in snow.  Additionally, looks to be five toes.  Possibly a hind foot registered a front.  Juvenile wolf/big yote maybe?  Not really looking like the track of those E WA calf snatchers.   

[huntnphool]

 Next time be sure to use something to give comparable scale, it leaves less room for speculation.

[Caseyd]

Next time be sure to use something to give comparable scale, it leaves less room for speculation.

You know that’s an old track when it’s an iPhone 1 

[huntnphool]

I think that was a 3 back then, but it still gives it scale as a example.

[Tiger1358]

Next time be sure to use something to give comparable scale, it leaves less room for speculation.

You know that’s an old track when it’s an iPhone 1 

 

[Skyvalhunter]

6'10" he shouldn't be out there he should stay home and play basketball

[oldschool]

 Young wolf and I live in the area and .they are there.

[HuntNFish]

Young wolf and I live in the area and .they are there.

They are there indeed.  I have been up to his cabin before when the coyotes were howling at 1am, stopped and then the wolves started howling.  We were up and started laughing because we imagined the coyotes started running out of there fast.  We know the difference between howl sounds made by the species and the difference in tracks.  This track was 4 inches wide.   He just left the area and is back in the Puget sound area, but make no mistake, there are wolves in the loop loop pass area.  We haven't seen them in person yet but we've seen tracks larger than this around his property before.  And his neighbors that live full time in the area have trail cam pics of the pack around the full time living community.  The mule deer population the past 4 years has also gone down hill.  Not sure if its all been due to the wolf pack, but I'm sure they have taken out some of the resident deer population that used to live around the community of homes.  It's hard to spot the deer now and a few years ago they were all over the place. 

[boneaddict]

I’m sure I’ll make someone feel bad, but that’s probably a German Shepherd or lab. Lol.  If that’s a wolf that’s about the smallest one I’ve ever seen.   There are certainly wolves in the area, not arguing that. 



I missed the part where he was 6 10.   Hmmmm. Yeah, still not the normal shape though.  🤔

[idaho guy]

I’m sure I’ll make someone feel bad, but that’s probably a German Shepherd or lab. Lol.  If that’s a wolf that’s about the smallest one I’ve ever seen.   There are certainly wolves in the area, not arguing that. 



I missed the part where he was 6 10.   Hmmmm. Yeah, still not the normal shape though.  🤔

I agree that its not a wolf track doesn't look like what I normally see I have no idea about that area so if you say wolves are there I believe you!

[HighlandLofts]

 They are either coyotes or house pets unless the state says there are wolves there which they seldom do.
So if I am in a area the state says there are no wolves that make any canine in that area fair game. It is what it is.
Just because you think you seen a wolf or a wolf track doesn't mean you really seen a wolf or a wolf track.the state will tell you other wise. So I listen to what these liars say and take appropriate actions.

[jackelope]

They are either coyotes or house pets unless the state says there are wolves there which they seldom do.
So if I am in a area the state says there are no wolves that make any canine in that area fair game. It is what it is.
Just because you think you seen a wolf or a wolf track doesn't mean you really seen a wolf or a wolf track.the state will tell you other wise. So I listen to what these liars say and take appropriate actions.

Sooooooo......If a moose is standing in the middle of downtown Seattle, is it still a moose, or is it a deer because WDFW says there are no moose in downtown Seattle? Based on this logic, you’re ok shooting said mystery moose/deer creature in deer season because it’s not a moose?

[wolfbait]

If WDFW say there are no wolves in an area then the public must take their word for it, after all WDFW are soooooooo honest....

WDFW is literally creating the hate of wolves! If they would take care of problem animals and show equal consideration for our other wildlife, many people would be far more receptive to having a reasonable wolf population. 

 


I think most people by now have their own idea on what needs to be done. WDF&Wolves etc. have shown they have no plans of trying to control their wolves, or manage ungulate herds to promote hunting.

Folks are and will take care of wolf problems on their own, WDFW has no appetite in confirming wolves until they are forced to do so, dragging delisting out until wolves have had the opportunity to expand and do as much damage as possible. Wolves will never be controlled in WA, the public will be responsible for defending their communities, animals etc..

[cavemann]

They are either coyotes or house pets unless the state says there are wolves there which they seldom do.
So if I am in a area the state says there are no wolves that make any canine in that area fair game. It is what it is.
Just because you think you seen a wolf or a wolf track doesn't mean you really seen a wolf or a wolf track.the state will tell you other wise. So I listen to what these liars say and take appropriate actions.

Sooooooo......If a moose is standing in the middle of downtown Seattle, is it still a moose, or is it a deer because WDFW says there are no moose in downtown Seattle? Based on this logic, you’re ok shooting said mystery moose/deer creature in deer season because it’s not a moose?

jackelope..  While I understand where you are coming I also understand the frustration from those saying "no wolves, must be a coyote."  In other states precedence has been set based off of assumed knowledge it is reasonable an animal could be mistaken that is not there based off of what wild life management assertions are.  If they say they are not there, we reasonably would assume they are not there..  Not trying to argue your point, but agree that WDFW's failure to not identify kills and confirm wolves in an area where they certainly are could make for an interesting defense..

https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/2017/11/13/missouri-girl-14-thought-she-shooting-deer-when-she-pulled-trigger/858472001/

[Taco280AI]

Coyotes. Shoot them.

[jackelope]

They are either coyotes or house pets unless the state says there are wolves there which they seldom do.
So if I am in a area the state says there are no wolves that make any canine in that area fair game. It is what it is.
Just because you think you seen a wolf or a wolf track doesn't mean you really seen a wolf or a wolf track.the state will tell you other wise. So I listen to what these liars say and take appropriate actions.

Sooooooo......If a moose is standing in the middle of downtown Seattle, is it still a moose, or is it a deer because WDFW says there are no moose in downtown Seattle? Based on this logic, you’re ok shooting said mystery moose/deer creature in deer season because it’s not a moose?

jackelope..  While I understand where you are coming I also understand the frustration from those saying "no wolves, must be a coyote."  In other states precedence has been set based off of assumed knowledge it is reasonable an animal could be mistaken that is not there based off of what wild life management assertions are.  If they say they are not there, we reasonably would assume they are not there..  Not trying to argue your point, but agree that WDFW's failure to not identify kills and confirm wolves in an area where they certainly are could make for an interesting defense..

https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/2017/11/13/missouri-girl-14-thought-she-shooting-deer-when-she-pulled-trigger/858472001/

With all due respect, when they can't "confirm" wolves presence, does that mean the same thing as them saying there are no wolves? Or does it simply mean they can't confirm the presence of wolves in an area? I guarantee you, especially with all the crap they take from both sides of the aisle, WDFW is not going to say one way or the other, that an animal is a wolf without being able to scientifically verify or confirm it was in fact a wolf. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.

[cavemann]

agreed Jackelope, I guess I was just also trying to give a little credence to both sides..  If it is taken at face value there have been live stock kills and kill sites that could have been proven that were still not confirmed by WDFW and their livelihood is what is being taken (livestock)..  I can see the frustration.

[KopperBuck]

They are either coyotes or house pets unless the state says there are wolves there which they seldom do.
So if I am in a area the state says there are no wolves that make any canine in that area fair game. It is what it is.
Just because you think you seen a wolf or a wolf track doesn't mean you really seen a wolf or a wolf track.the state will tell you other wise. So I listen to what these liars say and take appropriate actions.

Sooooooo......If a moose is standing in the middle of downtown Seattle, is it still a moose, or is it a deer because WDFW says there are no moose in downtown Seattle? Based on this logic, you’re ok shooting said mystery moose/deer creature in deer season because it’s not a moose?

jackelope..  While I understand where you are coming I also understand the frustration from those saying "no wolves, must be a coyote."  In other states precedence has been set based off of assumed knowledge it is reasonable an animal could be mistaken that is not there based off of what wild life management assertions are.  If they say they are not there, we reasonably would assume they are not there..  Not trying to argue your point, but agree that WDFW's failure to not identify kills and confirm wolves in an area where they certainly are could make for an interesting defense..

https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/2017/11/13/missouri-girl-14-thought-she-shooting-deer-when-she-pulled-trigger/858472001/

With all due respect, when they can't "confirm" wolves presence, does that mean the same thing as them saying there are no wolves? Or does it simply mean they can't confirm the presence of wolves in an area? I guarantee you, especially with all the crap they take from both sides of the aisle, WDFW is not going to say one way or the other, that an animal is a wolf without being able to scientifically verify or confirm it was in fact a wolf. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.

That's the problem... they should be objective and not influenced by crap from both sides.

[wolfbait]

 Instead of being honest with the people of WA, WDFW refuse to confirm known wolf packs/wolves, this has been proven many times and is still happening today. They would rather say their are no wolves as opposed to confirming wolves for delisting.

A few years back a friend of mine was hunting coyotes in the Perrygin lake country, he came across a canyon that was littered with dead deer and wolf tracks. He contacted WDFW they told him there were no wolves in that area, so he said he would hunting that area aggressively, they told him not to shoot the big coyotes.

Omak Flats was having wolf problems in 2010-2011, WDFW claimed it was coyotes, which was a total lie and they knew no one believed them. I could give example after example of WDFW lying to the public over wolf sightings/problems.

As far as WDFW being influenced, look at WDFW predator management policies and who they have partnered up with, it isn't in favor of hunting, hunters or livestock producers.

[jackelope]

They are either coyotes or house pets unless the state says there are wolves there which they seldom do.
So if I am in a area the state says there are no wolves that make any canine in that area fair game. It is what it is.
Just because you think you seen a wolf or a wolf track doesn't mean you really seen a wolf or a wolf track.the state will tell you other wise. So I listen to what these liars say and take appropriate actions.

Sooooooo......If a moose is standing in the middle of downtown Seattle, is it still a moose, or is it a deer because WDFW says there are no moose in downtown Seattle? Based on this logic, you’re ok shooting said mystery moose/deer creature in deer season because it’s not a moose?

jackelope..  While I understand where you are coming I also understand the frustration from those saying "no wolves, must be a coyote."  In other states precedence has been set based off of assumed knowledge it is reasonable an animal could be mistaken that is not there based off of what wild life management assertions are.  If they say they are not there, we reasonably would assume they are not there..  Not trying to argue your point, but agree that WDFW's failure to not identify kills and confirm wolves in an area where they certainly are could make for an interesting defense..

https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/2017/11/13/missouri-girl-14-thought-she-shooting-deer-when-she-pulled-trigger/858472001/

With all due respect, when they can't "confirm" wolves presence, does that mean the same thing as them saying there are no wolves? Or does it simply mean they can't confirm the presence of wolves in an area? I guarantee you, especially with all the crap they take from both sides of the aisle, WDFW is not going to say one way or the other, that an animal is a wolf without being able to scientifically verify or confirm it was in fact a wolf. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.

That's the problem... they should be objective and not influenced by crap from both sides.

Rather than objective, I think they're just covering their hind quarters.

[KopperBuck]

  I know how it works. That's why I left government work.

[jasnt]

One of the easiest ways to tell wolf tracks from coyote is the stride.  26”-30” is Wolf   Less than 24 is not.

[HighlandLofts]

I have a friend who.had wolves in his back yard a few years ago when he called the game department he was past off the three different people there. He went through the *censored* with all.three wildlife people and the third guy told him there are definatly no wolves in that area.
So his reply was the next time he sees a large coyote on his property he was going to shoot them.
Then they guy said if you shoot a wolf it is a crime. The game department had trucks up.& down his road that afternoon and everyday for a couple of weeks.

I dont believe any thing this game department has to say about anything. In my oppinion they are just lieing POS with a political motive.

That is one reason I will.never buy a hunting license in this state.

[Buckhunter82]

I spoke with a WDFW officer a few years ago. He flat out said his department was lying about the numbers and locations of wolves and that he hoped the locals would do what they needed to do. He blamed the biologist and told me the guys on the enforcement end are mostly hunters and don't want wolves around either. In my view the department is corrupt and has zero credibility. Would be nice to see something change but it won't.

[jasnt]

I spoke with a WDFW officer a few years ago. He flat out said his department was lying about the numbers and locations of wolves and that he hoped the locals would do what they needed to do. He blamed the biologist and told me the guys on the enforcement end are mostly hunters and don't want wolves around either. In my view the department is corrupt and has zero credibility. Would be nice to see something change but it won't.