Post by: villageidiot on March 11, 2013, 08:27:58 PM
Sunday morning, at approximately 1:00 AM, John _____ was awakened by one of his dogs furiously barking and growling, while still inside the house, at their living room sliding glass deck doors. John hurried to the door and saw a very large wolf up on the ten-foot-high deck, savagely attacking his blue heeler dog. He opened the door in an attempt to rescue his dog, but his other dog pushed past him out to the attack. The wolf and dog fought out on the deck for a short time before the wolf lept off the deck and headed toward the creek bottom with John's dog hot on his heels. The blue heeler, "Shelby" was taken to Daniel Deweert's Valley Veterinary Clinic for treatment. "Shelby" is still in critical condition with deep puncture wounds to her head and neck..
WDFW was called. John told them that he was within two feet of the wolf in an attempt to save his dog, but WDFW suggested "perhaps it was a cougar instead of a wolf!" John assured them that he was within very close proximity to the wolf, and that he had numerous wolf sightings close to his home and knew a wolf when he saw one. John asked WDFW if they would be paying any of the vet bills, their reply was, "We will have to send this information to Olympia to see if it will be called a wolf attack or not."
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs20.postimage.org%2Fj75l5gaql%2FIMG_7649.jpg&hash=8520c5a3ca967bcc420b6cd82e290418f6074883)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs20.postimage.org%2Fyrcyvzkv1%2FIMG_7695.jpg&hash=0eebd1501f3580ecde92c2de5574166cba1cc091)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs20.postimage.org%2Fd3jf7sv31%2FIMG_7617.jpg&hash=f1dd9f0a5dfa906510acee54d9a3667f93a4c1d8)
(last name removed to protect the identity of the victim)
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on March 11, 2013, 08:35:02 PM
Post by: CementFinisher on March 11, 2013, 08:40:32 PM
Post by: Sniper101 on March 11, 2013, 08:45:36 PM
Sad... hope for a full recovery. Freaking sickens me damm pro wolfer showes up and starts the this wasnt a wolf crap. people wdfw is not on your side!:yeah:
Post by: mkcj on March 11, 2013, 08:46:23 PM
Post by: snowpack on March 11, 2013, 08:48:47 PM
A cougar :bash: really! There is NO way that you would NOT be able to tell the difference between a cougar attack and a wolf attack. The dog would have claw marks on it for sure not to mention the bight marks would be different from the two jaw patterns. It really makes me made when these wildlife agents think that everyone not in their field are idiots.:yeah:
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on March 11, 2013, 08:51:22 PM
Wife sucks, have to see if its a wolf attack. :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: Jingles on March 11, 2013, 09:59:37 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on March 11, 2013, 10:04:23 PM
Post by: Dan-o on March 11, 2013, 10:05:34 PM
Post by: Bullkllr on March 11, 2013, 10:19:04 PM
John asked WDFW if they would be paying any of the vet bills, their reply was, "We will have to send this information to Olympia to see if it will be called a wolf attack or not."
:bash:Friggin' wrong :bash: Sick, actually comes to mind :bash:
Post by: bobcat on March 11, 2013, 10:20:14 PM
Post by: Ridgeratt on March 11, 2013, 10:21:29 PM
This is sad, but not something that can be blamed on the WDFW. And I'm not sure why the state should be paying the vet bill.
I'm still in favor of sending you a few!!! Just tell me where to send the check! :IBCOOL:
Post by: Kola16 on March 11, 2013, 10:24:23 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 11, 2013, 10:27:14 PM
This is sad, but not something that can be blamed on the WDFW. And I'm not sure why the state should be paying the vet bill.
I'm still in favor of sending you a few!!! Just tell me where to send the check! :IBCOOL:
Save your money. Wolves are a wild animal and if they want to be here, they can get here with the use of their own four feet. Just like they got to Twisp, by walking across the Canadian border. Hmm... Maybe Canada should be responsible for the vet bill? :dunno:
Post by: KFhunter on March 11, 2013, 10:31:08 PM
I'd be steaming pissed if some state official discredited me right to my face
Post by: bobcat on March 11, 2013, 10:35:27 PM
I think you missed the point
I'd be steaming pissed if some state official discredited me right to my face
Maybe so. I wasn't going to make any judgements on that aspect, since I wasn't there and don't really know what was said, and by who.
Post by: KFhunter on March 11, 2013, 10:37:47 PM
Post by: Ridgeratt on March 11, 2013, 10:39:47 PM
I can't imagine someone making that little tidbit up :rolleyes:
If my dog had gotten hung up like that I will roll the dice!!
Post by: KFhunter on March 11, 2013, 11:02:16 PM
I can't imagine someone making that little tidbit up :rolleyes:
If my dog had gotten hung up like that I will roll the dice!!
You would have used your expert opinion and determined it was a coyote.
Post by: Austrian Hunter on March 11, 2013, 11:03:17 PM
Post by: ollie on March 11, 2013, 11:18:43 PM
Post by: grundy53 on March 11, 2013, 11:43:09 PM
Animals being animals... I believe it's called nature?Not when it's on your front porch... >:(
sent from my typewriter
Post by: bigtex on March 11, 2013, 11:48:07 PM
This is sad, but not something that can be blamed on the WDFW. And I'm not sure why the state should be paying the vet bill.
Just like if a dog got attacked by a deer, eaten by a cougar, peoples cats get eaten all the time by coyotes.
I'd have to think really hard about not putting the dog down after that :'(
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 12:38:06 AM
HELLO.... Hunters, ranchers, and rural residents are not pouring in lots of money for wolves, no, the WDFW has sold out to the wolf lovers who are pouring in the money for wolves. They fell victim to the dollars and the disney wolf story the same way IDFG and MFWP did.
My guess is that in the end, this wolf money will dry up and hunters dollars will dissipate when the herds have been reduced which is exactly how it has played out in ID & MT, the WDFW and the people of WA will be left with a landscape full of wolves and no more big easy dollars for WDFW.
Folks, we are all watching 100 years of responsible wildlife management being thrown right out the window.
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 01:02:28 AM
- WDFW insisted on a wolf plan requiring 15 BP's. Idaho and MT approved plans for only 10 BP's, does anyone really think WA has 50% more habitat?
- After getting their 15 BP plan approved by the commission WDFW has failed to even make a reasonable attempt to verify known wolf packs.
- WDFW only has had 2 or 3 trappers to trap wolves to collar in the entire state, anyone can do the math on sq miles of habitat to see this failure.
- A qualified trapper in Colville has provided WDFW with trailcam photos of wolves, they won't hire him because he doesn't have a college degree.
- Local citizens and hunters have provided enough sightings to keep 2 dozen trappers busy confirming wolves that are already here.
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
- WDFW wants to analyze wolf stories in Olympia, this must be to look for a way to discredit every story. Agents are allowed to identify any other predation in the field. Managers in Olympia will be using the info gathered by the agents at the location. This is hogwash, the people should demand and end to this lunacy.
Post by: huntingfool7 on March 12, 2013, 06:34:38 AM
Hope the old girl is doing better. :sry:
Wife sucks, have to see if its a wolf attack. :bash: :bash: :bash:
Boss300- Auto correct?
A case of WDFW story spinning and streamlining paperwork. I wonder about their motivations.
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 06:55:40 AM
Terrible as it is, you're just asking for it if you don't keep your dog(s) within a fenced enclosure. It's not that expensive to drive some metal posts into the ground and zip tie wire mesh to it. Doubling up with an invisible fence unit to keep the dog from getting any ideas if getting beyond that adds to the security.
Even without wolves that would be common sense given the other predators and animals that can generally cause harm to a dog that we have in this state.
I remember hearing stories about people's dogs running off into the night after coyotes and never coming back here on the west side. I still just shake my head at the Pollyanna mindset of some.
This isn't a pro wolf statement, I just think the owner was unwise, especially given current conditions.
Post by: boneaddict on March 12, 2013, 07:09:43 AM
A cougar :bash: really! There is NO way that you would NOT be able to tell the difference between a cougar attack and a wolf attack. The dog would have claw marks on it for sure not to mention the bight marks would be different from the two jaw patterns. It really makes me made when these wildlife agents think that everyone not in their field are idiots.
No Kidding. I've been dealing with it for years.
Post by: bugs n bones on March 12, 2013, 07:09:57 AM
WDFW is responsible for this and here is why I say this:Bearpaw is right!!! All the agents are doing now is documenting the demise of washingtons wildlife
- WDFW insisted on a wolf plan requiring 15 BP's. Idaho and MT approved plans for only 10 BP's, does anyone really think WA has 50% more habitat?
- After getting their 15 BP plan approved by the commission WDFW has failed to even make a reasonable attempt to verify known wolf packs.
- WDFW only has had 2 or 3 trappers to trap wolves to collar in the entire state, anyone can do the math on sq miles of habitat to see this failure.
- A qualified trapper in Colville has provided WDFW with trailcam photos of wolves, they won't hire him because he doesn't have a college degree.
- Local citizens and hunters have provided enough sightings to keep 2 dozen trappers busy confirming wolves that are already here.
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
- WDFW wants to analyze wolf stories in Olympia, this must be to look for a way to discredit every story. Agents are allowed to identify any other predation in the field. Managers in Olympia will be using the info gathered by the agents at the location. This is hogwash, the people should demand and end to this lunacy.
Post by: sirmissalot on March 12, 2013, 07:10:17 AM
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing this guy doesn't have fencing on his property?
Terrible as it is, you're just asking for it if you don't keep your dog(s) within a fenced enclosure. It's not that expensive to drive some metal posts into the ground and zip tie wire mesh to it. Doubling up with an invisible fence unit to keep the dog from getting any ideas if getting beyond that adds to the security.
Even without wolves that would be common sense given the other predators and animals that can generally cause harm to a dog that we have in this state.
I remember hearing stories about people's dogs running off into the night after coyotes and never coming back here on the west side. I still just shake my head at the Pollyanna mindset of some.
This isn't a pro wolf statement, I just think the owner was unwise, especially given current conditions.
Do you have any idea how high a wolf can jump? How tall should your fence be? I suppose we should only walk our dogs in fully fenced areas too... Suppose the state ought to pay for those too!
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on March 12, 2013, 07:11:56 AM
Post by: boneaddict on March 12, 2013, 07:13:36 AM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on March 12, 2013, 07:15:22 AM
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing this guy doesn't have fencing on his property?
Terrible as it is, you're just asking for it if you don't keep your dog(s) within a fenced enclosure. It's not that expensive to drive some metal posts into the ground and zip tie wire mesh to it. Doubling up with an invisible fence unit to keep the dog from getting any ideas if getting beyond that adds to the security.
Even without wolves that would be common sense given the other predators and animals that can generally cause harm to a dog that we have in this state.
I remember hearing stories about people's dogs running off into the night after coyotes and never coming back here on the west side. I still just shake my head at the Pollyanna mindset of some.
This isn't a pro wolf statement, I just think the owner was unwise, especially given current conditions.
He probably has dogs so he doesn't have to have a fence.
The situation sucks. If it was a wolf attack, kill the wolf, stitch the dog up and move on.
Post by: boneaddict on March 12, 2013, 07:19:21 AM
(last name removed to protect the victim)
Post by: Arnbo on March 12, 2013, 07:28:01 AM
With a massive overpopulation of Blacktails in the Lake Whatcom watershed
So many deer are hit every week so should the WDFW pay for the auto damage?
Take a ride in a tall vehicle and I guarantee Atleast 3dead deer in the ditch before
You hit gate 3 by the store.How Bout some Archery tags for this area?
Seems better then dead deer and damaged cars and trucks...
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 07:32:59 AM
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing this guy doesn't have fencing on his property?
Terrible as it is, you're just asking for it if you don't keep your dog(s) within a fenced enclosure. It's not that expensive to drive some metal posts into the ground and zip tie wire mesh to it. Doubling up with an invisible fence unit to keep the dog from getting any ideas if getting beyond that adds to the security.
Even without wolves that would be common sense given the other predators and animals that can generally cause harm to a dog that we have in this state.
I remember hearing stories about people's dogs running off into the night after coyotes and never coming back here on the west side. I still just shake my head at the Pollyanna mindset of some.
This isn't a pro wolf statement, I just think the owner was unwise, especially given current conditions.
He probably has dogs so he doesn't have to have a fence.
The situation sucks. If it was a wolf attack, kill the wolf, stitch the dog up and move on.
That's probably true. But anyone using dogs like that to ward off predators has to know that they stand a chance of losing a dog that way.
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 07:39:20 AM
Aspenbud, did you miss the part where the dog was ON THE PORCH.
I didn't miss that. From a human safety standpoint that's a real problem.
But from the angle of dog ownership this guy either knew potential risk to his dogs or chose to live in unreality or was incredibly foolish. Which of those it was I don't know, but fencing for dogs is a good idea to prevent such attacks whether you live in wolf country or not.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 12, 2013, 07:43:44 AM
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing this guy doesn't have fencing on his property?
Terrible as it is, you're just asking for it if you don't keep your dog(s) within a fenced enclosure. It's not that expensive to drive some metal posts into the ground and zip tie wire mesh to it. Doubling up with an invisible fence unit to keep the dog from getting any ideas if getting beyond that adds to the security.
Even without wolves that would be common sense given the other predators and animals that can generally cause harm to a dog that we have in this state.
I remember hearing stories about people's dogs running off into the night after coyotes and never coming back here on the west side. I still just shake my head at the Pollyanna mindset of some.
This isn't a pro wolf statement, I just think the owner was unwise, especially given current conditions.
Uh huh. ;)
The wolf was attacking his dog ON THE PORCH. If you're not a pro-wolfer, I'm not an elk hunter. The mindset problem in this thread isn't the dog owner's. It's that of people who think that a person whose property, livestock, pets, or family is attacked by wolves must've done something wrong.
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 07:55:58 AM
Post by: MR5x5 on March 12, 2013, 08:00:07 AM
Pretty sure the deer, elk, cougars and such are "wards" of the state. If not, why would they feel inclined to ever compensate anybody for any damage caused by them.
For damn sure the state is liable.
You have the right to protect yourself your family and your property.
Post by: Fishstiq on March 12, 2013, 08:04:03 AM
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
Regarding the bolded part of what was said here... is it illegal for people to protect themselves and/or their animals from wolves? Would the guy in the story be in trouble if he had shot the wolf?
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 08:05:02 AM
Post by: muzbuster on March 12, 2013, 08:07:08 AM
(insert sarcasm font)
Post by: grundy53 on March 12, 2013, 08:07:49 AM
The dog owner isn't at fault here, but either is the WDFW. They didn't put that wolf there. And delisting? Even if the Feds would allow that to happen, it wouldn't have saved the dog on the porch. Sounds like a bunch of liberals on here- blaming the government deformed everything.
I agree to a point. What makes wolves different from , coyotes, deer, porqupines, cougars, Is that the state is partly to blame. With their poor management which is to say non management. They just bury their heads and the sand and blame everything on anything but wolves.
Post by: grundy53 on March 12, 2013, 08:08:25 AM
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
Regarding the bolded part of what was said here... is it illegal for people to protect themselves and/or their animals from wolves? Would the guy in the story be in trouble if he had shot the wolf?
big time
Post by: Jingles on March 12, 2013, 08:08:44 AM
Post by: grundy53 on March 12, 2013, 08:22:42 AM
Post by: Hawgdawg on March 12, 2013, 08:27:49 AM
Hope the old girl is doing better. :sry::dunno:
Wife sucks, have to see if its a wolf attack. :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: Fishstiq on March 12, 2013, 08:28:50 AM
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
Regarding the bolded part of what was said here... is it illegal for people to protect themselves and/or their animals from wolves? Would the guy in the story be in trouble if he had shot the wolf?
big time
So if I'm on my own property, fully fenced, and a wolf shows up and attacks me, I can't legally shoot it?
Post by: Curly on March 12, 2013, 08:31:22 AM
The dog owner isn't at fault here, but either is the WDFW. They didn't put that wolf there. And delisting? Even if the Feds would allow that to happen, it wouldn't have saved the dog on the porch. Sounds like a bunch of liberals on here- blaming the government deformed everything.
I agree to a point. What makes wolves different from , coyotes, deer, porqupines, cougars, Is that the state is partly to blame. With their poor management which is to say non management. They just bury their heads and the sand and blame everything on anything but wolves.
:yeah:
WDFW has blame with any wolf attacks from here on out. They came up with a ridiculous wolf plan and now they have to live with the criticism that goes along with it. WDFW sucks. :twocents:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 12, 2013, 08:32:46 AM
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
Regarding the bolded part of what was said here... is it illegal for people to protect themselves and/or their animals from wolves? Would the guy in the story be in trouble if he had shot the wolf?
big time
So if I'm on my own property, fully fenced, and a wolf shows up and attacks me, I can't legally shoot it?
Of course you can. You'd just better have a video of it on your throat before you kill it.
Post by: muzbuster on March 12, 2013, 08:34:31 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 08:40:11 AM
Well, we're not even close to that number yet. I could see the argument that the state is liable for this wolf attack, IF the 15 breeding pair goal had been met or exceeded, and the WDFW continued to not have an open season on wolves.
But that's not the case. This would have happened regardless of anything the WDFW did or did not do.
Post by: Curly on March 12, 2013, 08:43:20 AM
Wolf plan or not, the wolves would still be here in the same numbers they are now. The wolf plan didn't change anything. Other than it calls for 15 breeding pairs.
Well, we're not even close to that number yet. I could see the argument that the state is liable for this wolf attack, IF the 15 breeding pair goal had been met or exceeded, and the WDFW continued to not have an open season on wolves.
But that's not the case. This would have happened regardless of anything the WDFW did or did not do.
That all might be true, but WDFW has an image problem because of their love for the wolf. And, maybe the wolf attack would not have happened if there was a shoot on sight attitude that would make the wolves more wary of humans. :twocents:
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 08:45:13 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 08:48:36 AM
Quote
That all might be true, but WDFW has an image problem because of their love for the wolf. And, maybe the wolf attack would not have happened if there was a shoot on sight attitude that would make the wolves more wary of humans.
Shoot on sight? An endangered species? How do you suppose the WDFW would convince the Feds to allow that?
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 08:57:19 AM
So if my dog attacks kills the neighbors dog on his doorstep, then it is the neighbors fault for not having a fence???
Well your neighbor can take you to court for it and even sue you for damages. You might even get slapped with a few fines from the county for letting a public nuisance/menace run loose and/or any leash law violations and your dog might get picked up and euthanized by animal control. ALL AVOIDABLE IF YOU HAD KEPT YOUR DOG FENCED IN.
I know of a guy out here who had a neighbor who thought his dogs should be able to run free too. The problem is the dogs kept running off the property and attacking his sheep. He warned his neighbor a number of times and asked him to please tie his dogs up or fence them in. The neighbor ignored him and one day the gentleman called his neighbor and said he had his dogs and would drop them off. When he did he backed into his neighbor's driveway and rolled each dead dog that he had shot out the back of his truck and went home saying, "I warned you."
That too, was avoidable if the guy would have just fenced his dogs in.
I'm not disagreeing that a wolf showing up on the guy's porch is a problem. But give me a break, we live in predator country in many parts of Washington. You can either take steps to minimize the chance of an encounter between a predator and your dog, or even kids, on your property or you can roll the dice and expect that your bright and sunshine filled world might go dark one day.
You have the right to protect yourself your family and your property.
You are absolutely right and that's a big problem with the wolf issue these days, you can't protect what's yours or even yourself from them with a firearm. But in the absence of that you can take other steps to minimize problems in some cases.
For what it's worth, I'd be preaching this if they were coyotes, cougars, bear, or other dogs that had attacked this guy's pooch. That it was a wolf is in some ways quite secondary here.
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 08:57:59 AM
The dog owner isn't at fault here, but either is the WDFW. They didn't put that wolf there. And delisting? Even if the Feds would allow that to happen, it wouldn't have saved the dog on the porch. Sounds like a bunch of liberals on here- blaming the government deformed everything.
I agree to a point. What makes wolves different from , coyotes, deer, porqupines, cougars, Is that the state is partly to blame. With their poor management which is to say non management. They just bury their heads and the sand and blame everything on anything but wolves.
:yeah: exactly... that is the difference, WDFW has force rules on us that do not apply to other species so the result is that we cannot protect our property against wolves. Even the feds have deleisted 1/3 of the state. There is a ruling due out from USFWS anytime that could hopefully delist the rest of Washington. If delisted, then WDFW is the only thing preventing a person from protecting their property from wolves anywhere in WA.
Post by: muzbuster on March 12, 2013, 09:02:01 AM
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 09:02:58 AM
If WDFW had not forced a wolf plan putting 150% as many wolves to delist as in ID, MT, WY, and if WDFW had hired 2 dozen rather than only 2 wolf trappers, I am nearly certian we would have nearly enough wolf packs confirmed to delist. This is a case of incompetence. :twocents:
Post by: Oldguy on March 12, 2013, 09:06:13 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 09:10:12 AM
Say wolves got delisted 6 months ago. Would this particular wolf that did this be dead, just due to it no longer being listed as an endangered species?
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 09:11:55 AM
What I find interesting is that on the "Wet Side" if there is a problem with a nuisance bear or cougar, the WDFW is happy trap or tranquilize the animal and move it. On the "Dry Side" they put a tracking collar on the nuisance and pretend it is a cougar.
Doesn't matter the side of the state. Bears and cougars aren't on the endangered species list. Wolves are.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 12, 2013, 09:13:03 AM
So if my dog attacks kills the neighbors dog on his doorstep, then it is the neighbors fault for not having a fence???
Well your neighbor can take you to court for it and even sue you for damages. You might even get slapped with a few fines from the county for letting a public nuisance/menace run loose and/or any leash law violations and your dog might get picked up and euthanized by animal control. ALL AVOIDABLE IF YOU HAD KEPT YOUR DOG FENCED IN.
I know of a guy out here who had a neighbor who thought his dogs should be able to run free too. The problem is the dogs kept running off the property and attacking his sheep. He warned his neighbor a number of times and asked him to please tie his dogs up or fence them in. The neighbor ignored him and one day the gentleman called his neighbor and said he had his dogs and would drop them off. When he did he backed into his neighbor's driveway and rolled each dead dog that he had shot out the back of his truck and went home saying, "I warned you."
That too, was avoidable if the guy would have just fenced his dogs in.
I'm not disagreeing that a wolf showing up on the guy's porch is a problem. But give me a break, we live in predator country in many parts of Washington. You can either take steps to minimize the chance of an encounter between a predator and your dog, or even kids, on your property or you can roll the dice and expect that your bright and sunshine filled world might go dark one day.You have the right to protect yourself your family and your property.
You are absolutely right and that's a big problem with the wolf issue these days, you can't protect what's yours or even yourself from them with a firearm. But in the absence of that you can take other steps to minimize problems in some cases.
For what it's worth, I'd be preaching this if they were coyotes, cougars, bear, or other dogs that had attacked this guy's pooch. That it was a wolf is in some ways quite secondary here.
First of all, cougars and bears don't breed like wolves and they don't hunt in packs. Comparing us living with cougars and bears to living with wolves is like comparing a lone gunman to an army. There's no comparison.
Secondly, you're still either ignoring the point or don't believe people living in the country should be able to protect themselves or their property. The wolf attacked the dog on the guy's front porch. Just because someone lives in the country doesn't mean they give up their right of self-preservation. Because you live in a city, does that mean that drug addicts and homeless people should be able to rob you without fear of recrimination or of you protecting yourself? Of course not. There's no difference. Humans have lived in the countryside here in WA for tens of thousands of years and have been killing animals which threaten them that whole time. Why should this be different?
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 09:14:30 AM
But nothing they did or didn't do would have stopped this particular wolf attack from happening. Heck there have been wolves in the Twisp area for over twenty years. They maybe were never totally eradicated. But they have definitely been around for at least two decades.
Say wolves got delisted 6 months ago. Would this particular wolf that did this be dead, just due to it no longer being listed as an endangered species?
Other than the fact that he could shoot it, would it have made a difference if it was a cougar that attacked his dog instead?
Sorry, I see two separate issues here. One is that wolves in this state are getting brazen and people should be able to protect themselves from them. The other is that pet owners need to be a little more responsible.
Post by: muzbuster on March 12, 2013, 09:15:52 AM
Let me clarify some of my previous points again.
If WDFW had not forced a wolf plan putting 150% as many wolves to delist as in ID, MT, WY, and if WDFW had hired 2 dozen rather than only 2 wolf trappers, I am nearly certian we would have nearly enough wolf packs confirmed to delist. This is a case of incompetence. :twocents:
:yeah:
Agreed, incompetence at its highest level!
Post by: buckfvr on March 12, 2013, 09:18:17 AM
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 09:24:57 AM
Next, ask the guy whos dog got attacked on the front porch.
Ask the old lady who spoke at the Colville meeting why she is afraid of wolves and afriad to walk outside her home since wolves have arrived in her neighborhood.
I wonder what happens when a wolf is sighted inside the I-5 corridor neighborhoods, will people be told to put a high fence around all homes. :dunno:
FYI - There is a member on this forum who says they have fresh trail cam photos of wolves in GMU 460, I am sorry I can not say who at this time.
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 09:30:08 AM
But nothing they did or didn't do would have stopped this particular wolf attack from happening. Heck there have been wolves in the Twisp area for over twenty years. They maybe were never totally eradicated. But they have definitely been around for at least two decades.
Say wolves got delisted 6 months ago. Would this particular wolf that did this be dead, just due to it no longer being listed as an endangered species?
Other than the fact that he could shoot it, would it have made a difference if it was a cougar that attacked his dog instead?
Sorry, I see two separate issues here. One is that wolves in this state are getting brazen and people should be able to protect themselves from them. The other is that pet owners need to be a little more responsible.
hhhmmmm
humanure, is that you?
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 09:37:44 AM
Ask Hirshey on here if she thinks wolves act like cougar or bear. I can't speak for her and won't try, but anyone who knows about her incident can guess what she might say.
Next, ask the guy whos dog got attacked on the front porch.
Ask the old lady who spoke at the Colville meeting why she is afraid of wolves and afriad to walk outside her home since wolves have arrived in her neighborhood.
I wonder what happens when a wolf is sighted inside the I-5 corridor neighborhoods, will people be told to put a high fence around all homes. :dunno:
FYI - There is a member on this forum who says they have fresh trail cam photos of wolves in GMU 460, I am sorry I can not say who at this time.
Predators are predators. Leave Fluffy or Moe in an open yard and you're inviting problems. Even then some can get past your best counter measures, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't contain your dogs.
Ask the people who owned the dogs below if they see any difference between a wolf attacking their dog versus what actually attacked their dogs...
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Cougar-kills-pet-dog-in-Cle-Elum-yard-196310611.html (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Cougar-kills-pet-dog-in-Cle-Elum-yard-196310611.html)
Coyote Attack - Graphic - Coyotes attack dog in Fountain Valley California (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTtLSYdC4OE#)
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Traps-to-be-set-after-black-bear-attacks-kills-pet-dog-in-yard/-/1637132/15743078/-/6ypnfaz/-/index.html (http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Traps-to-be-set-after-black-bear-attacks-kills-pet-dog-in-yard/-/1637132/15743078/-/6ypnfaz/-/index.html)
Again, I think we all should have a right to defend ourselves and what's ours from wolves and that includes shooting them. But God gave us all brains, I believe we should use them and do what we can to protect pets and kids from predators as best as we can. Nothing is 100%, but it beats doing nothing.
Take some personal responsibility for keeping your dogs out of trouble.
Post by: Curly on March 12, 2013, 09:44:01 AM
But nothing they did or didn't do would have stopped this particular wolf attack from happening. Heck there have been wolves in the Twisp area for over twenty years. They maybe were never totally eradicated. But they have definitely been around for at least two decades.
Say wolves got delisted 6 months ago. Would this particular wolf that did this be dead, just due to it no longer being listed as an endangered species?
What I was trying to say earlier is that you are likely right that WDFW didn't necessarily do anything in this particular case to cause the problem with the wolf..........BUT if they would have delisted the areas of the state that the Feds would allow, they would have sent a message that they care about deer/elk/cattle/ people and their pets. The message they sent was a middle finger to us and that they love wolves and want way more wolves than should be allowed.
Post by: Hermannr on March 12, 2013, 10:19:12 AM
This is sad, but not something that can be blamed on the WDFW. And I'm not sure why the state should be paying the vet bill.
Why? Because you are not allowed to shoot the wolf...that is why. If I cannot defend my property as I see fit from a wild amimal (the state wants to make that animal their exclusive property), then just as if it were an agressive dog,,,the owner is liable for the bad acts of the animals under it's ownership and control.
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 10:29:49 AM
This is sad, but not something that can be blamed on the WDFW. And I'm not sure why the state should be paying the vet bill.
Why? Because you are not allowed to shoot the wolf...that is why. If I cannot defend my property as I see fit from a wild amimal (the state wants to make that animal their exclusive property), then just as if it were an agressive dog,,,the owner is liable for the bad acts of the animals under it's ownership and control.
As I said previously, you COULD shoot the wolf.
However, I'd like to see how you'd do so without also killing the dog at the same time.
Post by: sirmissalot on March 12, 2013, 10:33:01 AM
Aspenbud, did you miss the part where the dog was ON THE PORCH.
I didn't miss that. From a human safety standpoint that's a real problem.
But from the angle of dog ownership this guy either knew potential risk to his dogs or chose to live in unreality or was incredibly foolish. Which of those it was I don't know, but fencing for dogs is a good idea to prevent such attacks whether you live in wolf country or not.
How tall of a fence are you suggesting?? I've seen some elk fencing in wyoming that the wolves somehow either got through or jumped, and used it to their advantage to kill the elk. The state finally paid the rancher to remove it... you ought to see what the state paid for to replace it with too! Fancy looking stuff, but not elk proof, nor wolf proof...
I wouldn't be a bit surprised this guy had a fully fenced "non-wolfproof" yard and you're just attempting to make a completely invalid point without having a clue as to all the facts...
Post by: Smossy on March 12, 2013, 10:33:24 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 12, 2013, 10:34:17 AM
Ask Hirshey on here if she thinks wolves act like cougar or bear. I can't speak for her and won't try, but anyone who knows about her incident can guess what she might say.
Next, ask the guy whos dog got attacked on the front porch.
Ask the old lady who spoke at the Colville meeting why she is afraid of wolves and afriad to walk outside her home since wolves have arrived in her neighborhood.
I wonder what happens when a wolf is sighted inside the I-5 corridor neighborhoods, will people be told to put a high fence around all homes. :dunno:
FYI - There is a member on this forum who says they have fresh trail cam photos of wolves in GMU 460, I am sorry I can not say who at this time.
Predators are predators. Leave Fluffy or Moe in an open yard and you're inviting problems. Even then some can get past your best counter measures, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't contain your dogs.
Ask the people who owned the dogs below if they see any difference between a wolf attacking their dog versus what actually attacked their dogs...
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Cougar-kills-pet-dog-in-Cle-Elum-yard-196310611.html (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Cougar-kills-pet-dog-in-Cle-Elum-yard-196310611.html)
Coyote Attack - Graphic - Coyotes attack dog in Fountain Valley California (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTtLSYdC4OE#)
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Traps-to-be-set-after-black-bear-attacks-kills-pet-dog-in-yard/-/1637132/15743078/-/6ypnfaz/-/index.html (http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Traps-to-be-set-after-black-bear-attacks-kills-pet-dog-in-yard/-/1637132/15743078/-/6ypnfaz/-/index.html)
Again, I think we all should have a right to defend ourselves and what's ours from wolves and that includes shooting them. But God gave us all brains, I believe we should use them and do what we can to protect pets and kids from predators as best as we can. Nothing is 100%, but it beats doing nothing.
Take some personal responsibility for keeping your dogs out of trouble.
Maybe you just can't see my posts. THE DOG WAS ON HIS OWN PORCH. It sounds to me like a brazen wolf is the one looking for trouble. You sound like Humanure because you'll always take the side of the wolf regardless of the evidence available. Why are you posting on a hunting website. Oh yeah, you're a hunter, right? :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: AspenBud on March 12, 2013, 10:50:47 AM
Ask Hirshey on here if she thinks wolves act like cougar or bear. I can't speak for her and won't try, but anyone who knows about her incident can guess what she might say.
Next, ask the guy whos dog got attacked on the front porch.
Ask the old lady who spoke at the Colville meeting why she is afraid of wolves and afriad to walk outside her home since wolves have arrived in her neighborhood.
I wonder what happens when a wolf is sighted inside the I-5 corridor neighborhoods, will people be told to put a high fence around all homes. :dunno:
FYI - There is a member on this forum who says they have fresh trail cam photos of wolves in GMU 460, I am sorry I can not say who at this time.
Predators are predators. Leave Fluffy or Moe in an open yard and you're inviting problems. Even then some can get past your best counter measures, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't contain your dogs.
Ask the people who owned the dogs below if they see any difference between a wolf attacking their dog versus what actually attacked their dogs...
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Cougar-kills-pet-dog-in-Cle-Elum-yard-196310611.html (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Cougar-kills-pet-dog-in-Cle-Elum-yard-196310611.html)
Coyote Attack - Graphic - Coyotes attack dog in Fountain Valley California (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTtLSYdC4OE#)
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Traps-to-be-set-after-black-bear-attacks-kills-pet-dog-in-yard/-/1637132/15743078/-/6ypnfaz/-/index.html (http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Traps-to-be-set-after-black-bear-attacks-kills-pet-dog-in-yard/-/1637132/15743078/-/6ypnfaz/-/index.html)
Again, I think we all should have a right to defend ourselves and what's ours from wolves and that includes shooting them. But God gave us all brains, I believe we should use them and do what we can to protect pets and kids from predators as best as we can. Nothing is 100%, but it beats doing nothing.
Take some personal responsibility for keeping your dogs out of trouble.
Maybe you just can't see my posts. THE DOG WAS ON HIS OWN PORCH. It sounds to me like a brazen wolf is the one looking for trouble. You sound like Humanure because you'll always take the side of the wolf regardless of the evidence available. Why are you posting on a hunting website. Oh yeah, you're a hunter, right? :chuckle: :chuckle:
I addressed and acknowledged that a couple of times already. Perhaps you should go back and read things a little more closely before pounding away on the keyboard.
If we're down to grown men name calling this thread this has outgrown it's usefulness and I've probably made my point. Good luck.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 12, 2013, 10:59:30 AM
Post by: Fishstiq on March 12, 2013, 11:04:16 AM
As to the original subject, if there was something I could do to defend my dog in that scenario, I would do it. Protected or not, if the opportunity to shoot the wolf presented itself, I would take it.
Post by: Sniper101 on March 12, 2013, 11:08:38 AM
OR wdfw should be ronsponsible for not shipping them elsewhere as soon as they were found in the state!!!!! :bash: :bash: :IBCOOL:This is sad, but not something that can be blamed on the WDFW. And I'm not sure why the state should be paying the vet bill.
I'm still in favor of sending you a few!!! Just tell me where to send the check! :IBCOOL:
Save your money. Wolves are a wild animal and if they want to be here, they can get here with the use of their own four feet. Just like they got to Twisp, by walking across the Canadian border. Hmm... Maybe Canada should be responsible for the vet bill? :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 11:12:42 AM
No one's name calling. I'm just noticing a great similarity to a previous forum member named Humanure. I think you're either him or a very close clone. And, are you a hunter, and if so, what do you hunt and with what do you hunt?
I think it's kind of ridiculous to say someone posting here is a non-hunter :yike: just because everything he posts isn't in 100% agreement with your posts.
Have you not seen all of AspenBud's posts in the dog section and the bird hunting forum?
Post by: Smossy on March 12, 2013, 11:16:19 AM
I've always been kinda curious why non-hunters spend time on this board. :dunno:
As to the original subject, if there was something I could do to defend my dog in that scenario, I would do it. Protected or not, if the opportunity to shoot the wolf presented itself, I would take it.
Exactly. :tup: Oh what you ripped my dogs face off? :mgun2: Your pelt will make a great rug. The kind that I wipe my feet off on before walking inside.
Post by: Smossy on March 12, 2013, 11:18:41 AM
No one's name calling. I'm just noticing a great similarity to a previous forum member named Humanure. I think you're either him or a very close clone. And, are you a hunter, and if so, what do you hunt and with what do you hunt?
I think it's kind of ridiculous to say someone posting here is a non-hunter :yike: just because everything he posts isn't in 100% agreement with your posts.
Have you not seen all of AspenBud's posts in the dog section and the bird hunting forum?
Dont forget Smossy's posts on saving "His own dog before a stranger" lol Since were quoting names n all, I feel left out!
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 12, 2013, 11:33:54 AM
No one's name calling. I'm just noticing a great similarity to a previous forum member named Humanure. I think you're either him or a very close clone. And, are you a hunter, and if so, what do you hunt and with what do you hunt?
I think it's kind of ridiculous to say someone posting here is a non-hunter :yike: just because everything he posts isn't in 100% agreement with your posts.
Have you not seen all of AspenBud's posts in the dog section and the bird hunting forum?
I didn't say he was a non-hunter. I questioned if he was and what he hunted. And no, I haven't seen his posts in the bird hunting forum.
Post by: MR5x5 on March 12, 2013, 11:36:12 AM
Wolves are not coyotes and they are not porcupines. Just like certain dog breeds with inherent behaviors are treated differently then others. While it is uncertain if we can successfully coexist with the wolves...couldn't in the past. It seems ridiculous not to help them at least establish a healthy respect for humans.
Grey wolves endangered. BS. That is like saying elk are endangered in my back yard, I need a local release program.
NIMBYs piss me off!
SSS
Post by: VarmintVentilator on March 12, 2013, 02:01:24 PM
Post by: Smossy on March 12, 2013, 02:04:32 PM
Post by: Kola16 on March 12, 2013, 02:21:18 PM
Wait untill Coywolves make more of an appearance here. Then there will really confusion, Pest, or Endangered Species?No...they would be shoot at will....until you actually drop one....then aspenbud and his/her buddies all cry and seek vengence on you >:(
Stay off our HUNTING forum!!!
Just look at the most activities by aspenbud......HUMANURENo one's name calling. I'm just noticing a great similarity to a previous forum member named Humanure. I think you're either him or a very close clone. And, are you a hunter, and if so, what do you hunt and with what do you hunt?
I think it's kind of ridiculous to say someone posting here is a non-hunter :yike: just because everything he posts isn't in 100% agreement with your posts.
Have you not seen all of AspenBud's posts in the dog section and the bird hunting forum?
I didn't say he was a non-hunter. I questioned if he was and what he hunted. And no, I haven't seen his posts in the bird hunting forum.
Post by: Smossy on March 12, 2013, 02:37:52 PM
We could only hope. I personally think coyotes and wolves both need to die.Wait untill Coywolves make more of an appearance here. Then there will really confusion, Pest, or Endangered Species?No...they would be shoot at will....until you actually drop one....then aspenbud and his/her buddies all cry and seek vengence on you >:(Stay off our HUNTING forum!!!Just look at the most activities by aspenbud......HUMANURENo one's name calling. I'm just noticing a great similarity to a previous forum member named Humanure. I think you're either him or a very close clone. And, are you a hunter, and if so, what do you hunt and with what do you hunt?
I think it's kind of ridiculous to say someone posting here is a non-hunter :yike: just because everything he posts isn't in 100% agreement with your posts.
Have you not seen all of AspenBud's posts in the dog section and the bird hunting forum?
I didn't say he was a non-hunter. I questioned if he was and what he hunted. And no, I haven't seen his posts in the bird hunting forum.
Post by: boneaddict on March 12, 2013, 04:22:41 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv47%2Fboneaddict%2FAntler%2520Images%2Fcoywolf.jpg&hash=c05e12beddcf7a3fcb136bc3b8f08e18484e9c21)
Post by: bearpaw on March 12, 2013, 04:35:56 PM
Washington Dept of Fish & Wildlife
Olympia, Washington
Dear Wildlife Commissioners & Director Anderson,
I am writing to you as a very concerned citizen not only wondering if the WDFW intentionally misled the public about wolves from the beginning but also now wondering why WDFW appears to be making questionable statements to the public regarding WDFW’s response to wolf attacks.
More than a week ago WDFW personal conducted a public meeting in Colville in Stevens County and reassured an audience of about 300 people that WDFW personnel were trained in identifying wolf attacks and would respond to any wolf attack and make a determination on location if the attack was in fact wolves. The meeting was recorded by KCVL radio so this can be checked for validity. I thought this was a good statement “a sincere feeling of concern” was expressed by WDFW. The day before the meeting in Colville there was a meeting in Pend Oreille County and the day after a meeting was held in Okanogan County, I assume the same “sincere message of concern” was related to local people in those counties as well.
Two days ago at about 1:00 AM on March 10 an Okanogan County resident, John Stevie experienced a wolf attack on his front porch where he was two feet from the attacking wolf, two dogs were involved in the wolf attack one of which is still in critical condition. WDFW personnel at the site said they would have to send the info to Olympia where it would be determined if there was a wolf attack. This seems to be in contrast to what the people were told at the public meetings.
Here are the details that have been provided about the attack: http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,120578.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,120578.0.html)
WOLF ATTACKS LOCAL DOG, TWISP, WA
Sunday morning, at approximately 1:00 AM, John Stevie was awakened by one of his dogs furiously barking and growling, while still inside the house, at their living room sliding glass deck doors. John hurried to the door and saw a very large wolf up on the ten-foot-high deck, savagely attacking his blue heeler dog. He opened the door in an attempt to rescue his dog, but his other dog pushed past him out to the attack. The wolf and dog fought out on the deck for a short time before the wolf lept off the deck and headed toward the creek bottom with John's dog hot on his heels. The blue heeler, "Shelby" was taken to Daniel Deweert's Valley Veterinary Clinic for treatment. "Shelby" is still in critical condition with deep puncture wounds to her head and neck..
WDFW was called. Mr. Stevie told them that he was within two feet of the wolf in an attempt to save his dog, but WDFW suggested "perhaps it was a cougar instead of a wolf!" Mr. Stevie assured them that he was within very close proximity to the wolf, and that he had numerous wolf sightings close to his home and knew a wolf when he saw one. John asked WDFW if they would be paying any of the vet bills, their reply was, "We will have to send this information to Olympia to see if it will be called a wolf attack or not."
(photos attached)
____________________________________
I would like an answer as to why we were reassured of WDFW’s commitment” and yet it appears WDFW wants to analyze the details in Olympia. Is it not true that managers in Olympia will need to rely on info provided by agents at the scene. Why does this need to be sent to Olympia to determine if it was a wolf attack. Will actual details from the scene even be considered in the final determination? I am very concerned that the intention for sending this to Olympia is to determine how it can be dismissed as being caused by some other animal.
I reported an attack on two full grown German Shepherds inside their kennel by a pack of 5 wolves less than two years ago near Colville, the owner had to fire shots in the air to stop the attack, he said the wolves were as large or larger than his 100 pound German shepherds. I received a “not so friendly” call from Region 1 telling me that the owner of the dogs who has been my neighbor his entire life does not know what coyotes look like and that it must have been coyotes or even stray dogs. This winter wolves wearing radio collars have been seen within a few miles of Colville not far from where the attack occurred less than two years ago. Because a collared wolf was seen, I know the WDFW is aware that wolf was a few miles from Colville this winter. WDFW personnel did not tell the people this at the meeting in Colville, but probably half the audience knew about it. Does this help you to understand why there is so much distrust in WDFW.
In the Okanogan, ranchers have wolves howling all over the county yet WDFW personnel in that county maintain there is one wolf pack with only 2 or 3 wolves. A lady hunter was nearly attacked hunting near lake Chelan and now a dog has been killed on a front porch. Exactly what is it going to take for WDFW to understand that some WDFW personnel in the Okanogan are hiding the true number of wolves there?
I think there needs to be some serious accountability on the part of WDFW. Please look into this issue and please provide some assurance that WDFW will be accountable and responsive to the people. I also feel compelled to ask you to identify and make some changes in the personnel responsible for these inadequacies and figure out who is “wagging the dog”, it appears that there is a preference for some personnel within WDFW to promote wolves as being compatible in human inhabited areas at any expense and it is hampering WDFW’s ability to address wolf management accurately or professionally. Looking from the outside inward it appears a few bad apples are making the department look bad.
FYI - In Idaho Governor Butch Otter and the Idaho Wildlife Commission had to do some house cleaning in the IDFG before wolf management could begin. Certain people within IDFG were preventing any meaningful management due to personal beliefs.
Best Regards,
Post by: buckfvr on March 12, 2013, 04:42:53 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 05:07:15 PM
Is this all about whether the state pays the vet bill for the injured dog? If that's the case, heck no the state shouldn't pay a penny. It's ridiculous to me that the question was even asked. This was in Okanogan County, not in some big city. I would think people in that area would not ask for handouts from the government.
Country folks- aren't they supposedly self reliant and take responsibility for their own safety? Why is this the state's problem? Like I said before, they did not put the wolf there. Wolves are a native species. I'm sorry for the dog that got hurt, but don't blame the WDFW.
Post by: Kola16 on March 12, 2013, 05:16:55 PM
I still wonder if this coyote had something in him. There have been both dogs, wolves and coyotes where these two animals were filmed. Or just a dang fine specimen of a coyote.The one on the right has a sloped back.....maybe coydog :dunno:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv47%2Fboneaddict%2FAntler%2520Images%2Fcoywolf.jpg&hash=c05e12beddcf7a3fcb136bc3b8f08e18484e9c21)
Post by: CementFinisher on March 12, 2013, 05:24:22 PM
Post by: KFhunter on March 12, 2013, 05:29:18 PM
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing this guy doesn't have fencing on his property?
Terrible as it is, you're just asking for it if you don't keep your dog(s) within a fenced enclosure. It's not that expensive to drive some metal posts into the ground and zip tie wire mesh to it. Doubling up with an invisible fence unit to keep the dog from getting any ideas if getting beyond that adds to the security.
Even without wolves that would be common sense given the other predators and animals that can generally cause harm to a dog that we have in this state.
I remember hearing stories about people's dogs running off into the night after coyotes and never coming back here on the west side. I still just shake my head at the Pollyanna mindset of some.
This isn't a pro wolf statement, I just think the owner was unwise, especially given current conditions.
Do you have any idea how high a wolf can jump? How tall should your fence be? I suppose we should only walk our dogs in fully fenced areas too... Suppose the state ought to pay for those too!
Sounds like this poster missed the little tidbit about the deck being ten feet off the ground, if the wolf jumps up on your elevated deck what good is the average yard fencing going to do?
Post by: coastie hunter on March 12, 2013, 05:30:06 PM
Post by: villageidiot on March 12, 2013, 05:40:51 PM
Post by: Oldguy on March 12, 2013, 05:53:14 PM
Post by: CementFinisher on March 12, 2013, 06:11:48 PM
Post by: Curly on March 12, 2013, 06:15:07 PM
Country folks- aren't they supposedly self reliant and take responsibility for their own safety? Why is this the state's problem? Like I said before, they did not put the wolf there. Wolves are a native species. I'm sorry for the dog that got hurt, but don't blame the WDFW.
Yes, they take responsibility, but WDFW won't allow them to shoot wolves. :bash:
Post by: snowpack on March 12, 2013, 06:20:42 PM
If a cougar kills or maims a pet WDFW comes and takes the animals out or moves it. Why don't they do this with wolves.I was thinking about this earlier, and when people I know report cougars on their property (just a sighting) they usually get a pamphlet for living with wildlife. If the cougar attacked anything, they get issued special tags to allow them to shoot the cat OR WDFW would find someone with hounds and go after the cat. By them suggesting this was a cougar, if they really thought it was..then they would've normally taken some kind of action. So, it leads one to believe then that even they actually think it was a wolf.
They are probably scared of Ranker and their wolf hugger commisioner Kehne, to do anything about a problem wolf.
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 06:21:56 PM
Country folks- aren't they supposedly self reliant and take responsibility for their own safety? Why is this the state's problem? Like I said before, they did not put the wolf there. Wolves are a native species. I'm sorry for the dog that got hurt, but don't blame the WDFW.
Yes, they take responsibility, but WDFW won't allow them to shoot wolves. :bash:
That's not the WDFW's decision to make. It's all on the US Fish & Wildlife Service (Feds.). So blame them if you must.
Even if shooting wolves were allowed, it most likely would not have changed this incident.
I'd say if this guy needs the government to reimburse him anytime something happens to one of his animals, he needs to move to Seattle. Sounds like he'd fit right in with the city folk.
Post by: Curly on March 12, 2013, 06:27:24 PM
Post by: motg9_6 on March 12, 2013, 07:22:19 PM
Post by: INF on March 12, 2013, 07:58:11 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 08:37:10 PM
Bobcat, you need to *censored* keep your opinions to yourself unless you actually know something. Everybody here in Twisp knows these stupid wolves were planted here. So just stay on the coast and mind your own business and unless you know the man who this happened to I'd say stop bashing him.
Oh yeah? How do you know they were planted? I saw wolves in that area in 1990. So they've been there a while. And no, I don't know the man this happened to, and I haven't been bashing him. What I'm curious about is why anyone would feel the state owes him anything. I will promise to keep my opinions to myself, as long as you keep your opinions to yourself. Deal? And by the way, I don't live on the "coast." It's an hour and a half drive to get there from here.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 12, 2013, 08:41:22 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 08:43:11 PM
Well since this happened in 2009 we would know by now weather the state paid out for the vet bills.
Really? It was posted as if it just happened.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 12, 2013, 08:46:17 PM
WOLF ATTACKS LOCAL DOG, TWISP, WA
Sunday morning, at approximately 1:00 AM, John Stevie was awakened by one of his dogs furiously barking and growling, while still inside the house, at their living room sliding glass deck doors. John hurried to the door and saw a very large wolf up on the ten-foot-high deck, savagely attacking his blue heeler dog. He opened the door in an attempt to rescue his dog, but his other dog pushed past him out to the attack. The wolf and dog fought out on the deck for a short time before the wolf lept off the deck and headed toward the creek bottom with John's dog hot on his heels. The blue heeler, "Shelby" was taken to Daniel Deweert's Valley Veterinary Clinic for treatment. "Shelby" is still in critical condition with deep puncture wounds to her head and neck..
WDFW was called. Mr. Stevie told them that he was within two feet of the wolf in an attempt to save his dog, but WDFW suggested "perhaps it was a cougar instead of a wolf!" Mr. Stevie assured them that he was within very close proximity to the wolf, and that he had numerous wolf sightings close to his home and knew a wolf when he saw one. John asked WDFW if they would be paying any of the vet bills, their reply was, "We will have to send this information to Olympia to see if it will be called a wolf attack or not."
So Village Idiot, when did this supposed attack take place? Aren't you the one who posted the false story about the dog getting killed in Wallace Idaho? Do you have a source for your story?
It's funny there isn't a word about it in the Methow Valley News.
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 09:15:20 PM
Maybe it will show up in the newspaper tomorrow. :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on March 12, 2013, 09:35:53 PM
Here is one of the posts by "Sean T":
Quote
Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:33 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just talked with Mr Stevie, he assured me it was a wolf....So far hes talked with 2 fish and game guys and a state biologist ..I asked him about the cougar and he said it came up once and he assured them it was a wolf and they moved on...
No food on the deck just the dog, and he says hes seen 10 or 11 wolves around his place but never had a issue ..Dog has been to the vet 2 times so far for the bites and his dog was a female weighing 60 pounds..
he isn't a fan of the wolf and obviously hates them more now. Wolf description was dark colored wolf, 130 pounds, 5 3/4 prints. Overall a pretty nice dude...
And one more:
Quote
Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:04 pm
I actully talked with the guy and his version isn't quit so dramatic. His version has some grey areas as well.
Truth is all he knows is a wolf was fighting his dog on his porch. The dog could have been wandering around the property , encountered the wolf and high tailed it back up the stairs wolf in pursuit. Which isn't as sinister as the wolf stalking the dog as it slept on the porch dreaming of bones
The owner of the dog said there were puncture wounds, the pics show the shaved area done by the vet. Making the attack area look worse. The owner also stated the dog had to go back to the vet wednesday Obviously the attack wasn't severe enough to warrant over night stay since this will be his 3 rd vet visit. The owner told me the wolf was 130 pounds. 130 pounds versus 60. If he's correct in the wieght, then that's not to much of attack. When you consider damage to the dog..
Since there is no news story yet ,the OP on it wrote it up in a inflammatory way best suited for his views on wolves....
Post by: grundy53 on March 13, 2013, 05:12:17 AM
WOLF ATTACKS LOCAL DOG, TWISP, WA
Sunday morning, at approximately 1:00 AM, John Stevie was awakened by one of his dogs furiously barking and growling, while still inside the house, at their living room sliding glass deck doors. John hurried to the door and saw a very large wolf up on the ten-foot-high deck, savagely attacking his blue heeler dog. He opened the door in an attempt to rescue his dog, but his other dog pushed past him out to the attack. The wolf and dog fought out on the deck for a short time before the wolf lept off the deck and headed toward the creek bottom with John's dog hot on his heels. The blue heeler, "Shelby" was taken to Daniel Deweert's Valley Veterinary Clinic for treatment. "Shelby" is still in critical condition with deep puncture wounds to her head and neck..
WDFW was called. Mr. Stevie told them that he was within two feet of the wolf in an attempt to save his dog, but WDFW suggested "perhaps it was a cougar instead of a wolf!" Mr. Stevie assured them that he was within very close proximity to the wolf, and that he had numerous wolf sightings close to his home and knew a wolf when he saw one. John asked WDFW if they would be paying any of the vet bills, their reply was, "We will have to send this information to Olympia to see if it will be called a wolf attack or not."
So Village Idiot, when did this supposed attack take place? Aren't you the one who posted the false story about the dog getting killed in Wallace Idaho? Do you have a source for your story?
It's funny there isn't a word about it in the Methow Valley News.
My how quick the wolf lovers turn to defend their wolves....
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 13, 2013, 06:16:37 AM
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 07:02:42 AM
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 07:07:49 AM
Quote
It's funny there isn't a word about it in the Methow Valley News
It might be in a week or so, the MVN isn't the Seattle PI you realize.
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 07:10:39 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 07:17:00 AM
They have been pestering wolfbait and his livestock for the last couple weeks. Its interesting that when a cat does this, Wildlife comes out and kills the cat. You know, something hunters used to do with their own hounds. Now you as a taxpayer has to pay for some guy to do it. There are so few cats, thats why they are walking in downtown Twisp (which IS in the Methow Valley News) by the way. I do regresssssssss...... so, why is it the wolves get free parade. I think this is one of the hints Bobcat, WHY they are somewhat responsible.
They're cute and cuddly, and just like the family dog. Duh! :bash: :bash:
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 13, 2013, 07:17:59 AM
http://www.methowvalley.com/bb/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=28505 (http://www.methowvalley.com/bb/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=28505)
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 07:22:45 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 07:26:20 AM
Like I said you do realize this happened in 2009. Here is the blog it came from off the Methow Valley News webpage.
http://www.methowvalley.com/bb/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=28505 (http://www.methowvalley.com/bb/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=28505)
I don't see the year 2009 mentioned anywhere. :dunno:
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 07:28:34 AM
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 07:29:50 AM
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 07:31:17 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 07:45:07 AM
So in answer to your question- no, I don't see where you're coming from.
This will very likely happen again, and I don't want my tax dollars being spent every time it does.
Post by: grundy53 on March 13, 2013, 08:05:55 AM
Like I said you do realize this happened in 2009. Here is the blog it came from off the Methow Valley News webpage.
http://www.methowvalley.com/bb/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=28505 (http://www.methowvalley.com/bb/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=28505)
Read it a little more carefully. The post was 3/11/13. He registered to the site in 2009...
Post by: Fishstiq on March 13, 2013, 08:08:42 AM
I never said anything about a fence. Where did you get that idea? All I'm saying is the state doesn't need to be paying money every time something like this happens.
So in answer to your question- no, I don't see where you're coming from.
This will very likely happen again, and I don't want my tax dollars being spent every time it does.
If the government places protection on a wild animal that can be dangerous, and those protections say you cannot defend yourself, your pets or your property from these animals, I can see where someone might reason that the gov't is responsible for damages caused. If you won't let me stop it (and threaten legal action if I do), but you won't stop it either, it's reasonable to logically assume you as the decision maker are responsible for the outcome.
At the same time... when the gov't pays, you and I pay. The gov't cannot pay anything to anyone that they have not taken from other citizens first. So, why should I have to pay for a wolf attacking your dog? I didn't make the laws, but I would be forced to pay for the resulting damage. How is that fair, and how does that make any sense at all?
Tough subject, I see both sides of the argument.
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 10:45:08 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 10:54:01 AM
sorry bobcat it ws meant for aspenbud
Okay. I would say that it does seem like people could take responsibility for their pets and possibly keep them indoors at night, or in a kennel. If you're in an area that's known to have wolves does it make sense to let your dog (or cat) run loose at night?
Even if there aren't wolves there are going to always be bears, cougars, and coyotes. So I'd say the man whose dog was attacked is to blame for this. Not the government.
I'll add that I highly doubt the dog was just sitting on the porch when the wolf attacked. I would bet the dog was out roaming around and ran back to the porch when confronted by the wolf.
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 11:10:52 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 11:10:52 AM
sorry bobcat it ws meant for aspenbud
Okay. I would say that it does seem like people could take responsibility for their pets and possibly keep them indoors at night, or in a kennel. If you're in an area that's known to have wolves does it make sense to let your dog (or cat) run loose at night?
Even if there aren't wolves there are going to always be bears, cougars, and coyotes. So I'd say the man whose dog was attacked is to blame for this. Not the government.
I'll add that I highly doubt the dog was just sitting on the porch when the wolf attacked. I would bet the dog was out roaming around and ran back to the porch when confronted by the wolf.
That's an assumption for which there's no evidence. I could say the dog was probably tied up. I have just as much evidence for that.
If the man's children had been playing in their yard and a wolf had attacked them, would it then be the man's fault because he let his kids play outside? Many people move to the country so that their children will have a wholesome safe place to grow up and fresh air to breathe. Many people lived there long before the state DFW accepted and implemented an outrageous wolf plan, one that far exceeds anything else we've seen in the west. So now, what ever the wolves do is the responsibility of the people and property being attacked? This is precisely the attitude that says "the wolves were here before man. We don't have any right to keep them out or protect ourselves from them."
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 11:23:51 AM
Quote
If the man's children had been playing in their yard and a wolf had attacked them, would it then be the man's fault because he let his kids play outside.
This was in the middle of the night. How many people let their children play outside at 1:00 in the morning?
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 11:28:27 AM
Quote
i disagree! it was the gov that reintroduced these causing the problem they should be liable. although if the gov is liable that just means you and i have to flip the bill.
I doubt this wolf came from "reintroduced" wolves. Isn't it more likely that the wolves in the North Cascade Mountains got there by walking across the Canadian border?
If it could be proven that the WDFW put this particular wolf in this man's "backyard" then I would agree, the state is liable.
But, I don't think that's the case. Do you?
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 11:28:53 AM
I do remember that bobcat was one of the first to say how stupid Rep Kretz was to suggest moving wolves from NE WA to western Washington.
Funny how those on the westside who expect us on the eastside to change our lifestyles to accomodate wolves don't want anything to do with wolves in their neighborhood. :chuckle:
Post by: Northway on March 13, 2013, 11:38:34 AM
I grew up camping and recreating on the eastside every chance my dad could get away from Boeing. That pattern has not and will not change with wolves.
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 11:39:59 AM
Quote
Funny how those on the westside who expect us on the eastside to change our lifestyles to accomodate wolves don't want anything to do with wolves in their neighborhood.
I don't expect you to change your lifestyle. All I said is it makes sense to keep dogs and cats inside at night, or in a kennel or fenced yard. I keep my dog in at night. We often have coyotes in my back yard just on the other side of my fence. So I keep my dog inside, even though we don't have wolves.
Now kids on the other hand, that's entirely different. I'd think it much less likely for a kid to be attacked by a wolf. Dogs and wolves, obviously are going to fight. That's only natural and is to be expected.
This isn't a human were talking about here. It's a dog. So lets stay on topic.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 11:41:12 AM
Quotei disagree! it was the gov that reintroduced these causing the problem they should be liable. although if the gov is liable that just means you and i have to flip the bill.
I doubt this wolf came from "reintroduced" wolves. Isn't it more likely that the wolves in the North Cascade Mountains got there by walking across the Canadian border?
If it could be proven that the WDFW put this particular wolf in this man's "backyard" then I would agree, the state is liable.
But, I don't think that's the case. Do you?
You know that's a ridiculous argument. It's not about how the wolves got here, but how they're managed (or not managed as is the case). The wolf plan, which to this day protects wolves which the feds have delisted, makes it possible for the wolves to raid man's domain without fear of reprisal. We've trained them to go up on people's porches and kill their pets. We've taught them, long after we should have begun killing them, that there are no dangers for them anywhere in WA. This man's dog wasn't attacked because the man wasn't being responsible. It was attacked because our state isn't being responsible. It's been pandering to the greenies on the wolf issue and the people who live among them are paying the price.
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 11:43:56 AM
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 11:48:37 AM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 11:54:37 AM
I think your argument is ridiculous.
I don't believe Twisp is in the area that wolves have been delisted by the Feds. So even if the state wanted to have a hunting season on wolves, the Feds wouldn't allow it.
Post by: KFhunter on March 13, 2013, 11:57:11 AM
They won't "fit in" like city yotes, coons, skunks etc
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 11:57:19 AM
i think to just assume these came out of canada is dumb and trying to pass the blame off the real problem. they were introduced into wyoming shortly there after found in montana, idaho and now washington while over populating all along the way. if you cant see the pattern you need to go back to kindergarten and start playing with puzzles again. the over population of wolves in northern washington is causing cougars to move from the north to the south as well but this is another issue all together.
It's a moot point. It doesn't matter from where they came. We could live with wolves in WA, although that's not my choice. But we could. The wolf plan could've been designed in such a way as to have a reasonable number of breeding pairs and to protect their growth only in the most remote areas of the state, consistent with available wilderness and wild spaces, while protecting the livelihoods and safety of our citizens. But's our state chose to ignore the realities of modern day WA in favor of the wishes of a minority group of wacko greenies. They created a plan which recognizes nothing pertinent - our size, population density, and the safety of our citizens and their property. And again, through their inaction and the tying of our citizens hands, we're training these wolves that they can be anywhere, anytime. It doesn't matter if we had hand-raised them and released them from our backyards. If we showed them from the start that man and his things are off-limits, they'd be elsewhere. This is not the case.
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 11:59:12 AM
:cue:
Haha juust kidding, or am I? :dunno:
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 12:00:44 PM
i think to just assume these came out of canada is dumb and trying to pass the blame off the real problem. they were introduced into wyoming shortly there after found in montana, idaho and now washington while over populating all along the way. if you cant see the pattern you need to go back to kindergarten and start playing with puzzles again. the over population of wolves in northern washington is causing cougars to move from the north to the south as well but this is another issue all together.
What does it really matter where they came from? They're a native species, and they are there! Don't get mad at me! I don't want them either!
The only thing I'm trying to say is the state is not liable for someone's vet bill because his dog got bit.
I'm surprised with all the people on here who are for a smaller government, yet they want handouts from the government when something like this happens. :rolleyes:
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 12:01:34 PM
Wheres my obamaphone? :cryriver:i think to just assume these came out of canada is dumb and trying to pass the blame off the real problem. they were introduced into wyoming shortly there after found in montana, idaho and now washington while over populating all along the way. if you cant see the pattern you need to go back to kindergarten and start playing with puzzles again. the over population of wolves in northern washington is causing cougars to move from the north to the south as well but this is another issue all together.
What does it really matter where they came from? They're a native species, and they are there! Don't get mad at me! I don't want them either!
The only thing I'm trying to say is the state is not liable for someone's vet bill because his dog got bit.
I'm surprised with all the people on here who are for a smaller government, yet they want handouts from the government when something like this happens. :rolleyes:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 12:02:41 PM
If there were an open season on wolves, this kind of thing would still happen. Coyotes are hunted year around. Yet they still come into people's backyards and kill their pets and/or livestock. Shouldn't they have "learned" by now that people don't want their pets eaten?
I think your argument is ridiculous.
I don't believe Twisp is in the area that wolves have been delisted by the Feds. So even if the state wanted to have a hunting season on wolves, the Feds wouldn't allow it.
Wolves and coyotes are completely different animals with completely different instincts. There is no comparison between the two species at all.
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 12:04:13 PM
If there were an open season on wolves, this kind of thing would still happen. Coyotes are hunted year around. Yet they still come into people's backyards and kill their pets and/or livestock. Shouldn't they have "learned" by now that people don't want their pets eaten?
I think your argument is ridiculous.
I don't believe Twisp is in the area that wolves have been delisted by the Feds. So even if the state wanted to have a hunting season on wolves, the Feds wouldn't allow it.
Wolves and coyotes are completely different animals with completely different instincts. There is no comparison between the two species at all.
Okay, whatever you say.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 12:04:25 PM
i think to just assume these came out of canada is dumb and trying to pass the blame off the real problem. they were introduced into wyoming shortly there after found in montana, idaho and now washington while over populating all along the way. if you cant see the pattern you need to go back to kindergarten and start playing with puzzles again. the over population of wolves in northern washington is causing cougars to move from the north to the south as well but this is another issue all together.
What does it really matter where they came from? They're a native species, and they are there! Don't get mad at me! I don't want them either!
The only thing I'm trying to say is the state is not liable for someone's vet bill because his dog got bit.
I'm surprised with all the people on here who are for a smaller government, yet they want handouts from the government when something like this happens. :rolleyes:
That's because the government should've said no to the greenies on this one and had a very limited plan. They didn't and now it IS their fault people's pets and livestock are dying.
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 12:06:12 PM
Sure there are. Doglike hairy creatures, who hunt in packs and will eat/kill almost anything they feel they could get they're hands or paws on. Wolves are like coyotes jacked up on "Valkyrie" :chuckle:If there were an open season on wolves, this kind of thing would still happen. Coyotes are hunted year around. Yet they still come into people's backyards and kill their pets and/or livestock. Shouldn't they have "learned" by now that people don't want their pets eaten?
I think your argument is ridiculous.
I don't believe Twisp is in the area that wolves have been delisted by the Feds. So even if the state wanted to have a hunting season on wolves, the Feds wouldn't allow it.
Wolves and coyotes are completely different animals with completely different instincts. There is no comparison between the two species at all.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 12:06:47 PM
If there were an open season on wolves, this kind of thing would still happen. Coyotes are hunted year around. Yet they still come into people's backyards and kill their pets and/or livestock. Shouldn't they have "learned" by now that people don't want their pets eaten?
I think your argument is ridiculous.
I don't believe Twisp is in the area that wolves have been delisted by the Feds. So even if the state wanted to have a hunting season on wolves, the Feds wouldn't allow it.
Wolves and coyotes are completely different animals with completely different instincts. There is no comparison between the two species at all.
Okay, whatever you say.
Read about them. Their whole pack structure is completely different. Their hunting is different. Their mating is different. It's not what I say. You can find plenty of information that shows it.
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 12:08:56 PM
Tomato Tamoto!If there were an open season on wolves, this kind of thing would still happen. Coyotes are hunted year around. Yet they still come into people's backyards and kill their pets and/or livestock. Shouldn't they have "learned" by now that people don't want their pets eaten?
I think your argument is ridiculous.
I don't believe Twisp is in the area that wolves have been delisted by the Feds. So even if the state wanted to have a hunting season on wolves, the Feds wouldn't allow it.
Wolves and coyotes are completely different animals with completely different instincts. There is no comparison between the two species at all.
Okay, whatever you say.
Read about them. Their whole pack structure is completely different. Their hunting is different. Their mating is different. It's not what I say. You can find plenty of information that shows it.
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 12:10:43 PM
Quote
That's because the government should've said no to the greenies on this one and had a very limited plan. They didn't and now it IS their fault people's pets and livestock are dying.
The plan has nothing to do with this. If the WDFW had not written a wolf plan, the wolves would still be here, and the dog still would have been attacked.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 12:17:39 PM
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 12:23:16 PM
Post by: motg9_6 on March 13, 2013, 12:25:21 PM
i think your wrong if there was a good plan the wolves would have enough food they wouldnt need to come close to house they would stay i the mountain.QuoteThat's because the government should've said no to the greenies on this one and had a very limited plan. They didn't and now it IS their fault people's pets and livestock are dying.
The plan has nothing to do with this. If the WDFW had not written a wolf plan, the wolves would still be here, and the dog still would have been attacked.
Post by: snowpack on March 13, 2013, 12:29:01 PM
Yea Sean T is an idiot and he has an ID on here but won't dare show or post. One of those wolf lovers.Reading through his other posts, it looks like he is trying to organize some wolf lovers into capturing wolves and relocating them to the westside.
And bobcat, I don't want any gov handouts. Just want to 'hand out' a few 1 ounce slugs to any wolves near me without needing OJ's dream team to keep me out of the slammer.
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 12:29:14 PM
i think your wrong if there was a good plan the wolves would have enough food they wouldnt need to come close to house they would stay i the mountain.QuoteThat's because the government should've said no to the greenies on this one and had a very limited plan. They didn't and now it IS their fault people's pets and livestock are dying.
The plan has nothing to do with this. If the WDFW had not written a wolf plan, the wolves would still be here, and the dog still would have been attacked.
Wolf numbers have not yet reached what the plan calls for, not even close.
So I'd expect for these types of issues to get much worse as time goes on. This is only the beginning.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 13, 2013, 12:29:21 PM
WOLF ATTACKS LOCAL DOG, TWISP, WA
Sunday morning, at approximately 1:00 AM, John Stevie was awakened by one of his dogs furiously barking and growling, while still inside the house, at their living room sliding glass deck doors. John hurried to the door and saw a very large wolf up on the ten-foot-high deck, savagely attacking his blue heeler dog. He opened the door in an attempt to rescue his dog, but his other dog pushed past him out to the attack. The wolf and dog fought out on the deck for a short time before the wolf lept off the deck and headed toward the creek bottom with John's dog hot on his heels. The blue heeler, "Shelby" was taken to Daniel Deweert's Valley Veterinary Clinic for treatment. "Shelby" is still in critical condition with deep puncture wounds to her head and neck..
WDFW was called. Mr. Stevie told them that he was within two feet of the wolf in an attempt to save his dog, but WDFW suggested "perhaps it was a cougar instead of a wolf!" Mr. Stevie assured them that he was within very close proximity to the wolf, and that he had numerous wolf sightings close to his home and knew a wolf when he saw one. John asked WDFW if they would be paying any of the vet bills, their reply was, "We will have to send this information to Olympia to see if it will be called a wolf attack or not."
So Village Idiot, when did this supposed attack take place? Aren't you the one who posted the false story about the dog getting killed in Wallace Idaho? Do you have a source for your story?
It's funny there isn't a word about it in the Methow Valley News.
My how quick the wolf lovers turn to defend their wolves....
I'm not a wolf lover or a wolf hater. I'm actually pretty indifferent to wolves. I don't care if they are legally hunted or trapped or killed when caught in the act. But I'm not afraid of them and I'm not worried they are going to wipe game animals out so bad it's going to end hunting. In that case, I'm more worried that the State or timber companies are going to price hunters out of hunting with all their Special" fees.
So tell me where I defended any wolf in my post. All I asked for was a source for the story. There are a lot of people who knowingly and unknowingly post false stories on the internet. Wanting to check out the source before trusting the story is a prudent thing to do.
As for this story, if it's true, and the dog was contained, that wolf needs to be put down. If the dog was running loose, that's the owner's problem, just like it would be if a loose dog gets run over by a car.
But let's see a source first. Village Idiot isn't above posting false stories and swearing they're true.
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 12:29:52 PM
I disagree. If the plan had been written reasonably, with allowances for people to protect themselves and their property, it's quite possible the wolf would've been more wary of humans and stayed deeper in the woods. WY did it and let the feds know they wouldn't let them tie the hands of their citizens. We could've done it too. But instead, the DFW let the voices of Seattle decide what would happen in the NE and E parts of the state.Yeah well seattle dont know what the heck is going on outside the city. Buncha city folk. No wonder we have one of the most restricted states in the nation as far as dfw reulations go, your right though. Theyre far from dumb, they know (the wolves) that they are top of the food chain now and have no natural predators themselves. I understand what wdfw is trying to do but its not the right move. I say atleast open up draws for pulling wolf tags. That way they can control specific numbers not just let everyone have a hay day at it.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 12:30:50 PM
Yea Sean T is an idiot and he has an ID on here but won't dare show or post. One of those wolf lovers.Reading through his other posts, it looks like he is trying to organize some wolf lovers into capturing wolves and relocating them to the westside.
And bobcat, I don't want any gov handouts. Just want to 'hand out' a few 1 ounce slugs to any wolves near me without needing OJ's dream team to keep me out of the slammer.
:yeah: We wouldn't need handouts if we could protect ourselves and our stuff.
Post by: SGTDuffman on March 13, 2013, 12:31:28 PM
They set the mating pair requirements 50% higher than any other state with wolves, then never actually did anything to monitor the number of mating pairs. Had they either a) set a realistic number of mating pairs or b) done the legwork to establish the number of mating pairs, then the wolves could have been de-listed by both the Feds and the state, and people like this guy with a wolf problem would be allowed to deal with the problem. That's why some have suggested the state be held liable for damages. It's the fact that they prevent you from dealing with the problem on your end, and refuse to even acknowledge there is a problem on their end.
If they had done their jobs, the wolves would have been de-listed, and nuisance wolves could be treated like nuisance cougars. They would investigate and trap/tranq/relocate trouble animals or issue special permits to the property owners allowing them to deal with their own problem, then come collect the animals afterwords to remove any trophy value. They've done none of this. Instead they insist not only are the wolves no problem, but there are in fact no wolves, which is contradictory to the entire purpose of wildlife management. They have a duty and responsibility to investigate claims not only of wolf damage, but of wolf sightings. It was their plan, in their words, that dictated they define the number of breeding pairs in the state. If they are unable or unwilling to investigate the number of breeding pairs -in other words- to do their jobs, they need to be replaced by people who will do the job they're being paid to do.
I would imagine it SHOULD be fairly easy to verify this attack was a wolf. There are the bite marks, which alone would be sufficient, there should also likely be tracks and/or hairs around, as well as anything they know about previous wolf sightings in the the area that they most likely previously chose to ignore. Is it the states fault that a wolf came in the guys yard? No. Is it the states fault the guy isn't allowed to protect himself or his property. Yes. It may not have stopped this attack from occurring, but killing the wolf responsible would stop that wolf from attacking his dog or any other dogs in the future.
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 12:37:06 PM
Post by: villageidiot on March 13, 2013, 12:43:01 PM
Post by: Curly on March 13, 2013, 12:51:35 PM
If we had the right to shoot the wolf for destroying our property then no compensation would be expected but since we are not allowed to shoot the wolf then compensation should be provided for the precious wolf you can't kill. A multitude of coyotes are shot every year for killing all sorts of livestock but no livestock owner asks for compensation because he can deal with the vermin himself and is content with that. This solution is simple and not complicated and IT WORKS.
:yeah:
Post by: Sean T on March 13, 2013, 12:53:05 PM
Post by: KFhunter on March 13, 2013, 12:54:54 PM
ON that we agree, it's going to get much, much worse.i think your wrong if there was a good plan the wolves would have enough food they wouldnt need to come close to house they would stay i the mountain.QuoteThat's because the government should've said no to the greenies on this one and had a very limited plan. They didn't and now it IS their fault people's pets and livestock are dying.
The plan has nothing to do with this. If the WDFW had not written a wolf plan, the wolves would still be here, and the dog still would have been attacked.
Wolf numbers have not yet reached what the plan calls for, not even close.
So I'd expect for these types of issues to get much worse as time goes on. This is only the beginning.
We'll see what this summer brings when the cattle are let out to range.
Post by: KFhunter on March 13, 2013, 12:58:46 PM
what? Am i supposed to be afraid to post here?? LOL SKY Hunter or whatever you call yourself here..Stop being a scrub, why dont we meet up and take care of it
Behind the School, bicycle racks, 3:10 PM
BE THERE!!
Sorry, thought I was back in grade school there for a minute :chuckle:
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 13, 2013, 01:03:23 PM
"The Washington state Senate has passed a measure to allow livestock and pet owners to shoot gray wolves without a permit when the wolves are attacking or threatening their animals."
http://www.koinlocal6.com/news/local/story/WOLF-MANAGEMENT/SZOAa1tycUeoN9R6SygMOw.cspx (http://www.koinlocal6.com/news/local/story/WOLF-MANAGEMENT/SZOAa1tycUeoN9R6SygMOw.cspx)
"Additionally, according to The Oregonian, Senate Bill 5193/House Bill 1219 would reclassify wolves as big game."
Post by: Sean T on March 13, 2013, 01:10:51 PM
what? Am i supposed to be afraid to post here?? LOL SKY Hunter or whatever you call yourself here..Stop being a scrub, why dont we meet up and take care of it
Behind the School, bicycle racks, 3:10 PM
BE THERE!!
Sorry, thought I was back in grade school there for a minute :chuckle:
If i thought he would show i would go lol..Dude is like a little troll, from the hiking board over to here..Ive never posted here and signed up like 3 months ago. He must of looked on here for me...
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 01:23:58 PM
QuoteFunny how those on the westside who expect us on the eastside to change our lifestyles to accomodate wolves don't want anything to do with wolves in their neighborhood.
I don't expect you to change your lifestyle. All I said is it makes sense to keep dogs and cats inside at night, or in a kennel or fenced yard. I keep my dog in at night. We often have coyotes in my back yard just on the other side of my fence. So I keep my dog inside, even though we don't have wolves.
Now kids on the other hand, that's entirely different. I'd think it much less likely for a kid to be attacked by a wolf. Dogs and wolves, obviously are going to fight. That's only natural and is to be expected.
This isn't a human were talking about here. It's a dog. So lets stay on topic.
Bobcat, yes this is about our dogs, and our livestock, and our kids, and the poor old lady who testified at the Colville meeting that she is afraid to go outside because wolves are living close to her home. It's also about the young girl who nearly broke into tears beause her parents can't protect her goats and sheep against wolves.
I have owned hounds for almost 40 years and have never had to bring them into my home to keep them safe. I live on 32 acres a couple miles from Colville, we have seen moose, turkey, bear, deer, coyotes, and even a cougar on this place. Our hounds have been kept on a half acre portion of this acreage since we moved on this place about 25 years ago. Never have we worried about anything coming in and killing our entire family of dogs.
So let me get this straight Bobcat, you expect me to bring the 12 hounds and 1 bird dog in my home every night to keep them safe because you feel I am an unresponsible dog owner?
Specifically, I would like to know how that is not expecting my family to change our lifestyle because of wolves?
Are McIrvins supposed to bring their hundreds of cattle into their home at night? :chuckle:
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 01:26:01 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 01:29:39 PM
If you would support Kretz's bill you could share in the love? :chuckle:
Dale, if my dog was hurt by a wolf I wouldn't go crying to the state, asking for them to cover the vet bill. I guarantee that.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 13, 2013, 01:31:45 PM
QuoteFunny how those on the westside who expect us on the eastside to change our lifestyles to accomodate wolves don't want anything to do with wolves in their neighborhood.
I don't expect you to change your lifestyle. All I said is it makes sense to keep dogs and cats inside at night, or in a kennel or fenced yard. I keep my dog in at night. We often have coyotes in my back yard just on the other side of my fence. So I keep my dog inside, even though we don't have wolves.
Now kids on the other hand, that's entirely different. I'd think it much less likely for a kid to be attacked by a wolf. Dogs and wolves, obviously are going to fight. That's only natural and is to be expected.
This isn't a human were talking about here. It's a dog. So lets stay on topic.
Bobcat, yes this is about our dogs, and our livestock, and our kids, and the poor old lady who testified at the Colville meeting that she is afraid to go outside because wolves are living close to her home. It's also about the young girl who nearly broke into tears beause her parents can't protect her goats and sheep against wolves.
I have owned hounds for almost 40 years and have never had to bring them into my home to keep them safe. I live on 32 acres a couple miles from Colville, we have seen moose, turkey, bear, deer, coyotes, and even a cougar on this place. Our hounds have been kept on a half acre portion of this acreage since we moved on this place about 25 years ago. Never have we worried about anything coming in and killing our entire family of dogs.
So let me get this straight Bobcat, you expect me to bring the 12 hounds and 1 bird dog in my home every night to keep them safe because you feel I am an unresponsible dog owner?
Specifically, I would like to know how that is not expecting my family to change our lifestyle because of wolves?
Are McIrvins supposed to bring their hundreds of cattle into their home at night? :chuckle:
Great response Dale....Says a wetsider
Post by: pendoreilleadventures on March 13, 2013, 01:36:12 PM
QuoteFunny how those on the westside who expect us on the eastside to change our lifestyles to accomodate wolves don't want anything to do with wolves in their neighborhood.
I don't expect you to change your lifestyle. All I said is it makes sense to keep dogs and cats inside at night, or in a kennel or fenced yard. I keep my dog in at night. We often have coyotes in my back yard just on the other side of my fence. So I keep my dog inside, even though we don't have wolves.
Now kids on the other hand, that's entirely different. I'd think it much less likely for a kid to be attacked by a wolf. Dogs and wolves, obviously are going to fight. That's only natural and is to be expected.
This isn't a human were talking about here. It's a dog. So lets stay on topic.
Bobcat, yes this is about our dogs, and our livestock, and our kids, and the poor old lady who testified at the Colville meeting that she is afraid to go outside because wolves are living close to her home. It's also about the young girl who nearly broke into tears beause her parents can't protect her goats and sheep against wolves.
I have owned hounds for almost 40 years and have never had to bring them into my home to keep them safe. I live on 32 acres a couple miles from Colville, we have seen moose, turkey, bear, deer, coyotes, and even a cougar on this place. Our hounds have been kept on a half acre portion of this acreage since we moved on this place about 25 years ago. Never have we worried about anything coming in and killing our entire family of dogs.
So let me get this straight Bobcat, you expect me to bring the 12 hounds and 1 bird dog in my home every night to keep them safe because you feel I am an unresponsible dog owner?
Specifically, I would like to know how that is not expecting my family to change our lifestyle because of wolves?
Are McIrvins supposed to bring their hundreds of cattle into their home at night? :chuckle:
:yeah: :tup:
Post by: Special T on March 13, 2013, 01:50:12 PM
Pic on the front page of the Omak Chronicle :twocents: This needs a little more of this kind of exposure.
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 02:02:47 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv47%2Fboneaddict%2Fbucks2%2Fteamadmin.jpg&hash=14c4b6d2727102d845286ed9bd9afd0285355f21)
This is what a wolf looks like that does it....
x
Do you note the difference in the two species.
All of my adventures in the woods, I don't recall being hunted or threatened by a coyote. Yeah, there is a difference, and if you don't see it, then you are .......
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 02:05:43 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 13, 2013, 02:10:38 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 02:11:34 PM
The question that not many seem to be addressing: do you wish for your tax dollars to be paid out anytime someone's pet is killed or harmed by a wolf? (Or a coyote, cougar, bear, raccoon, porcupine, etc)
Post by: Kola16 on March 13, 2013, 02:12:09 PM
what? Am i supposed to be afraid to post here?? LOL SKY Hunter or whatever you call yourself here..Stop being a scrub, why dont we meet up and take care of it
Behind the School, bicycle racks, 3:10 PM
BE THERE!!
Sorry, thought I was back in grade school there for a minute :chuckle:
If i thought he would show i would go lol..Dude is like a little troll, from the hiking board over to here..Ive never posted here and signed up like 3 months ago. He must of looked on here for me...
You know it shows your join date, and what boards you us :hello: :tree1:
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 02:14:54 PM
Do you know why the state or the feds ARE RESPONSIBLE. Because they have LIED TO ALL OF US and continue to do so about the numbers of wolves out there. Eventually all of their lies will be found out. The hard way unfortunately.
Even if that is true, I don't see how that makes the government responsible. At least not the state government. You'd have a much easier time convincing me of that if you were talking about the federal government, who did transplant wolves into Idaho.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 13, 2013, 02:15:08 PM
QuoteFunny how those on the westside who expect us on the eastside to change our lifestyles to accomodate wolves don't want anything to do with wolves in their neighborhood.
I don't expect you to change your lifestyle. All I said is it makes sense to keep dogs and cats inside at night, or in a kennel or fenced yard. I keep my dog in at night. We often have coyotes in my back yard just on the other side of my fence. So I keep my dog inside, even though we don't have wolves.
Now kids on the other hand, that's entirely different. I'd think it much less likely for a kid to be attacked by a wolf. Dogs and wolves, obviously are going to fight. That's only natural and is to be expected.
This isn't a human were talking about here. It's a dog. So lets stay on topic.
Bobcat, yes this is about our dogs, and our livestock, and our kids, and the poor old lady who testified at the Colville meeting that she is afraid to go outside because wolves are living close to her home. It's also about the young girl who nearly broke into tears beause her parents can't protect her goats and sheep against wolves.
I have owned hounds for almost 40 years and have never had to bring them into my home to keep them safe. I live on 32 acres a couple miles from Colville, we have seen moose, turkey, bear, deer, coyotes, and even a cougar on this place. Our hounds have been kept on a half acre portion of this acreage since we moved on this place about 25 years ago. Never have we worried about anything coming in and killing our entire family of dogs.
So let me get this straight Bobcat, you expect me to bring the 12 hounds and 1 bird dog in my home every night to keep them safe because you feel I am an unresponsible dog owner?
Specifically, I would like to know how that is not expecting my family to change our lifestyle because of wolves?
Are McIrvins supposed to bring their hundreds of cattle into their home at night? :chuckle:
:yeah: :tup:
Post by: boneaddict on March 13, 2013, 02:25:33 PM
Your tax dollars are already at work, when they removed responsible hunters from being able to hound hunt. How much do you think these guys contracted with the state to chase cougars, who attack Fido cost?
How much does a apple tree eating elk cost you? :chuckle:
Put wolves on the same vermin list as porcupines and coyotes and then we can talk. Does that answer your question of why I might think someone should be responsible. Probably not. Hell, maybe youd rather tax dollars being spent to FRY locals who do know how to take care of the problem.
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 02:38:35 PM
If you would support Kretz's bill you could share in the love? :chuckle:
Dale, if my dog was hurt by a wolf I wouldn't go crying to the state, asking for them to cover the vet bill. I guarantee that.
OK that's fine, nobody is saying you have to ask for your vet bills to be paid. :tup:
Let me tell a little wolf story....
Myself and quite a few other people in the western U.S. didn't want any more wolves. Sure we've seen sign of the occasional wolf through the years but we never had packs that came in and killed our livestock or attacked dogs on our porches. But, we were told by the USFWS in 1995 that wolves were being introduced from Canada but they would be managed to have 10 BP's in each of three states or roughly 300 wolves across the three states of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. We were trustingly told that wolves would not have an impact on our wildlife and livestock predation would be dealt with.
Fast forward 18 Years
Next thing we know ID/MT/WY are harvesting more wolves each year than were supposed to exist altogether, yet the wolf population is still growing and spreading into neighboring states. There is a wolf plan in Washington (a state that is 4 or 5 times smaller than ID/MT/WY) which specifies we must have half as many wolves (15 BP's) as that much larger multi state area.
A few more important details...
Most of the people and the head office of the Fish & Wolf Dept who all want 15 BP's all live in western Washington where there are no wolves. The wolf plan reads that before wolves can be managed in eastern WA there must be wolves throughout the state and specifically so many wolves in each portion of the state. The logic used was that we need to protect wolves until they are in all parts of the state. Obviously the wolf lovers really want all the wolves to live so wolves can eventually colonize the entire state and we can all live with the wolves happily ever after.
Now the good part....
Representative Kretz introduces a wolf lovers perfect bill, a chance for the people of western Washington to share in the wolf love, eastern WA actually offers to give up a few of our beloved wolves and transplant them to western Washington, this is no different than when the wolf lovers supported the USFWS to transplant wolves to ID/MT/WY. Wolf lovers are expected to be seen cheering in the streets throughout western Washington.
Wait for it, wait for it....
Sadly to the disappointment of the humble and trusting people of Eastern WA, ID, MT, and WY, the wolf lovers in Western WA don't want the wolves, they really do not want to live with the wolves at all. :yike:
They want everyone else to live with the wolves. ;)
Moral of the story...
The moral of the story is that if we humble people of E WA have to live with these, cowkilling dogkilling land sharks, just so the wolf lovers can feel touchy feely good that wolves are frolicking with the butterflies, then the fricken self centered wolf lovers can step up and pay our vet bills.... :twocents:
Story book closed, stepping away from the rocking chair...
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on March 13, 2013, 02:43:26 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 02:44:28 PM
No, still didn't answer the question.
Maybe I should ask, do you think the state can AFFORD to compensate every single person who has any kind of wildlife damage done to their property?
I don't. Whether it's elk, deer, bears, cougars, or wolves. People need to take care if themselves and not rely on the government for everything.
And if a wolf is in your yard killing your cat, chicken, goat, dog, or whatever, shoot the damn thing! Don't tell me the government said you couldn't do that. The government won't know unless you tell someone.
Post by: CementFinisher on March 13, 2013, 02:54:33 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 03:20:38 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 03:22:51 PM
Part of the wolf agreement and the promise from the wolf lovers is that livestock damage would be compensated. :dunno:
Livestock I can understand. Pets, not so much. Who's paying for this anyway? The wolf lovers? Or the taxpayers?
Post by: Curly on March 13, 2013, 03:28:54 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 03:30:25 PM
I'm curious.......let's say it was a grizzly bear instead of a wolf. What would the difference be? :dunno:
Difference is the dog would be dead.
Post by: Curly on March 13, 2013, 03:31:20 PM
Post by: h20hunter on March 13, 2013, 03:31:44 PM
Post by: MR5x5 on March 13, 2013, 03:31:59 PM
This guy from the west side says relocate a bunch to the west side and bring this thing to a head.
Post by: snowpack on March 13, 2013, 03:35:40 PM
So why not drop a pair into Magnuson Park? Pretty straight forward, because it would be to dangerous to the local population and their pets. So why isn't the same consideration afforded to the folks in rural areas?Let Farmageddon begin you say? Won't be any livestock/pets left on the wetside either. :yike:
This guy from the west side says relocate a bunch to the west side and bring this thing to a head.
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 03:43:13 PM
Part of the wolf agreement and the promise from the wolf lovers is that livestock damage would be compensated. :dunno:
Livestock I can understand. Pets, not so much. Who's paying for this anyway? The wolf lovers? Or the taxpayers?
I don't remember if the promise included pets, but I feel it should.
Wolf lovers have fooled the agencies and the taxpayers, as soon as the wolves were established in the other states the taxpayers have been stiffed. Ya, I don't like it either but I expect the same here, I forgot that part in the wolf fairy tale. ;)
Grizzly Bears
I don't think there were pronises made about grizzlies like there was for wolves, like comparing apples to oranges!
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 03:51:21 PM
Quote
Wolf lovers have fooled the agencies and the taxpayers, as soon as the wolves were established in the other states the taxpayers have been stiffed. Ya, I don't like it either but I expect the same here, I forgot that part in the wolf fairy btale.
Well I don't feel taxpayers should be liable for any of it. I never made any promises to anybody that I and the other taxpayers would compensate them for any losses.
If the wolf loving organizations want to pay for it, more power to 'em! :tup:
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 03:53:57 PM
I really hope that part about the WDFW is untrue. Maybe they just asked to make sure and someone is making it into something it's not? I hope that's the case.
They assured me the wolves prey testing me in the Lake Chelan Rec Area were coyotes until I provided photos. It's that whole "guilty until proven innocent" thing except "any other predator until confirmed a wolf". :twocents:
Post by: MtnMuley on March 13, 2013, 03:58:58 PM
I really hope that part about the WDFW is untrue. Maybe they just asked to make sure and someone is making it into something it's not? I hope that's the case.
They assured me the wolves prey testing me in the Lake Chelan Rec Area were coyotes until I provided photos. It's that whole "guilty until proven innocent" thing except "any other predator until confirmed a wolf". :twocents:
I never saw your wolf photos posted on here. If there is a link, please post it. Heard they were in the Eastman's issue, but don't subscribe anymore. Thanks.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 03:59:24 PM
- There's enough wolves in WA to delist, people could protect themselves and animals if we had an agency that would confirm existing wolves.
Regarding the bolded part of what was said here... is it illegal for people to protect themselves and/or their animals from wolves? Would the guy in the story be in trouble if he had shot the wolf?
big time
So if I'm on my own property, fully fenced, and a wolf shows up and attacks me, I can't legally shoot it?
I was told unless I had bite marks ON me it's a good thing I didn't shoot the wolves that accosted me because I could have been in a world of legal trouble. :dunno: So from personal accounts, no.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 04:12:26 PM
Ask Hirshey on here if she thinks wolves act like cougar or bear. I can't speak for her and won't try, but anyone who knows about her incident can guess what she might say.They absolutely do not follow the same rules as other predators. When you have them at 15-20 yards charging you and trying to get at your side/back it is quite frustrating, especially when you feel like your world will change dramatically regardless of your action... if you shoot them, you have two choices: walk away and never tell anyone. OR take photos, hike out immediately, and hope that you aren't sued and hate mailed into oblivion.. If you don't shoot them, you either end up injured or killed if you can't prove you aren't to be eaten.
Bear and cougar (I've seen both and know they've seen me tenfold) have never acted like this towards me.
Post by: smdave on March 13, 2013, 04:13:36 PM
http://www.omakchronicle.com/news/frontnewspopup.shtml (http://www.omakchronicle.com/news/frontnewspopup.shtml)
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 04:22:48 PM
QuoteWolf lovers have fooled the agencies and the taxpayers, as soon as the wolves were established in the other states the taxpayers have been stiffed. Ya, I don't like it either but I expect the same here, I forgot that part in the wolf fairy btale.
Well I don't feel taxpayers should be liable for any of it. I never made any promises to anybody that I and the other taxpayers would compensate them for any losses.
If the wolf loving organizations want to pay for it, more power to 'em! :tup:
Hey I feel the same way about not wanting to foot the bill, but you and I and everybody reading this is already paying for wolves. :bdid:
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 04:29:07 PM
Wolf numbers have not yet reached what the plan calls for, not even close.
So I'd expect for these types of issues to get much worse as time goes on. This is only the beginning.
I certainly agree with the latter part of this statement. As for the wolf numbers... they are highly underestimated/confirmed.
If a plain jane like myself and her significant other can go out and have ... 4 wolf pack sightings in the last 2 years ranging from the Blues to the Sawtooths... with at least 2 unaccounted packs, there's a lot more out there than the state knows about or is willing to release information on. Most likely a combination of the two.
I've seen wolves 30 miles apart up the Methow this winter... days apart. Still just the lookout pack? *rolls eyes*. Texas Creek, Gold Creek, Golden Doe, Finley Canyon. Two sides of the highway.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 04:35:31 PM
Maybe I should ask, do you think the state can AFFORD to compensate every single person who has any kind of wildlife damage done to their property?
I don't. Whether it's elk, deer, bears, cougars, or wolves. People need to take care if themselves and not rely on the government for everything.
That's the thing.. if they aren't liable for the damages, the realized cost of having wolves in the state lies on the people that most likely don't want them there in the first place.. Can't afford to pay out? Open a hunting season! You're putting the burden on those that would prefer to manage the numbers by hunting. Since hunting isn't allowed, the burden should be placed on those that are restricting the ability to manage numbers and problem animals. :twocents:
Post by: saylean on March 13, 2013, 04:39:40 PM
what a crock.
Post by: wolfbait on March 13, 2013, 04:41:32 PM
In 2009 when WDFW bought the rest of the Golden Doe ranch, the first thing they did was release wolves on it. And the first thing their wolves did was kill a cow and a calf. WDFW and the USFWS ran to the local paper and said:
“By the time we got to the carcass it was too old for me to say yay or nay if it was killed by a wolf,” said Scott Fitkin, wildlife biologist with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. “It was clearly fed on by something, but not much was left but a lot of maggots.” Fitkin and a USDA Wildlife Services agent inspected the carcass on Friday (May 22).
http://www.conservationnw.org/pressroom/press-clips/proof-of-wolf-kill-may-elude-investigators (http://www.conservationnw.org/pressroom/press-clips/proof-of-wolf-kill-may-elude-investigators)
When experts examined the decomposing cow May 22, it had been so worked over by scavengers that there was little left but hide and hip bones.
Even so, "there was nothing about the carcass to indicate that wolves had anything to do with it," said Doug Zimmer, a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009307261_wolves06m.html (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009307261_wolves06m.html)
As many of you can see there was more to the cow story then WDFW and the USFWS wanted the public to know. And where is the calf, where was it mentioned when WDFW and the USFWS ran to the local paper?
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs12.postimage.org%2Fy6lwot171%2FWDFW_s_Released_Wolves_kill_a_cow_and_calf_3.png&hash=a18db5b46391bdd66f83c409d98392380f025686)
The summer of 2009 was a very bad year for wolves in the Methow Valley, we had them go through our yard and fields all summer long, WDFW's new wolves were even see at the Meat Market in Twisp, heading down to the dumpsters behind Hanks Market. A new mother pushing her baby down the Twisp/Carlton road was followed by three wolves until she came to a house she could enter, another lady in Twisp took a picture of a wolf standing in her yard, these sighting were in broad daylight. All were ignored by WDFW
Carlton resident says wolves killed chickens-Date: 08-12-2009
State wildlife biologist Scott Fitkin is skeptical that the predator was a wolf.
“The fact that the animal appeared unafraid, I’m more skeptical that it was a wolf,” said Fitkin. “The fact that she went out and yelled and banged things, it’s not characteristic of wolves, who seem skittish. We’ve not ruled out it being a wolf,” he said. “We have no evidence except her eyewitness, but we are looking for more information.”
http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=1878 (http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=1878)
Ask WDFW why several of them were parked along the county road by the Golden Doe access road with binoculars out watching their newly released wolves run across the hillside.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how WDFW and Conservation NW always make sure the statement that their "wolves migrated to WA on their own" is in every article they publish.
Last fall on the Loup pass two wolves were hit and killed, so according to WDFW's wolf count the Methow should be wolf free.
On the other hand we have had wolves around our place for the last two weeks, we had them within a few hundred yards of our house just last night, and we aren't the only ones. I talk to some folks from church last sunday, one from Libby Cr. said she had wolves howling on one side of the canyon and coyotes on the other. Another one from above Beaver Cr. said they have been hearing wolves practically every night. I have talk to people below Mazama who say the same thing, plus they saw wolves this winter. The lie that there is only one maybe two wolves in the Methow has always been just another lie. WDFW have refuse to confirm known wolf packs in the Methow Valley for several years now, every wolf seen they claim is part of the Lookout Pack even if the sightings of wolves were on the same day twenty miles apart..
The problem that WDFW has now is, their wolves are starting to eat their way out of natural prey and into pets, livestock and the public eye. As more of this happens WDFW will be forced to leap to their feet in surprise, just like IDFG finally did with their wolf slaughtered elk herds.
Aren't WDFW suppose to be wildlife managers? If WDFW were managing game animals there wouldn't be the predation problems we are having today. We wouldn't have to worry about our children playing in the backyard or going for hikes in the surrounding countryside like I did as a kid. We wouldn't hear WDFW telling us to lock our dogs up at night to avoid cougars and wolves killing them, and our game herds wouldn't be disappearing at an alarming rate. WDFW needs an overhaul, replace those who are in the pockets of the environmentalist with people who care about all wildlife not just protecting predators.
Dale, Thanks for writing a letter to WDFW, Good Job!
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 04:43:50 PM
Maybe I should ask, do you think the state can AFFORD to compensate every single person who has any kind of wildlife damage done to their property?
I don't. Whether it's elk, deer, bears, cougars, or wolves. People need to take care if themselves and not rely on the government for everything.
That's the thing.. if they aren't liable for the damages, the realized cost of having wolves in the state lies on the people that most likely don't want them there in the first place.. Can't afford to pay out? Open a hunting season! You're putting the burden on those that would prefer to manage the numbers by hunting. Since hunting isn't allowed, the burden should be placed on those that are restricting the ability to manage numbers and problem animals. :twocents:
Even with hunting, there will be problems. They're being hunted in Idaho now, correct? Have wolves stopped killing livestock and pets since the wolf season opened?
You say the burden should be placed on those who are restricting the ability to manage wolves.... so how do we identify who those particular individuals are? And if that's possible, do we then take deductions out of those people's paychecks and place it into a "wolf victim" fund?
Just wondering how all those in favor of wolves are going to be required to pay, while all of us who don't want wolves don't have to pay.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 04:45:37 PM
I really hope that part about the WDFW is untrue. Maybe they just asked to make sure and someone is making it into something it's not? I hope that's the case.
They assured me the wolves prey testing me in the Lake Chelan Rec Area were coyotes until I provided photos. It's that whole "guilty until proven innocent" thing except "any other predator until confirmed a wolf". :twocents:
I never saw your wolf photos posted on here. If there is a link, please post it. Heard they were in the Eastman's issue, but don't subscribe anymore. Thanks.
The majority of the account is on page 6 of the wolf sightings topic. Photo of one of the animals (didn't get both in spotting scope photo)
For some reason it doesn't appear that my photo links are working anymore.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ash4%2F299535_10100561156135508_235193550_n.jpg&hash=f0aa0fe285e32efce3a9b4a6ff21e2634a5f118b)
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 04:47:10 PM
Wolf numbers have not yet reached what the plan calls for, not even close.
So I'd expect for these types of issues to get much worse as time goes on. This is only the beginning.
I certainly agree with the latter part of this statement. As for the wolf numbers... they are highly underestimated/confirmed.
If a plain jane like myself and her significant other can go out and have ... 4 wolf pack sightings in the last 2 years ranging from the Blues to the Sawtooths... with at least 2 unaccounted packs, there's a lot more out there than the state knows about or is willing to release information on. Most likely a combination of the two.
I've seen wolves 30 miles apart up the Methow this winter... days apart. Still just the lookout pack? *rolls eyes*. Texas Creek, Gold Creek, Golden Doe, Finley Canyon. Two sides of the highway.
hirshey, please post all your sightings (any type) in the wolf topic on here to help us keep WDFW accountable and post them on the WDFW wolf sightings page if you haven't already done that.
I had a good phone discussion with Donny Martorello in Olympia a while ago and he said they will be looking at the okanogan this year for more wolves. He also told me they are looking at the areas where they get the most sightings reported, so it's imperative that we get as many sightings reported as possible.
I am putting together another letter that will better detail my conversation that I will post here when finished.
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 04:52:21 PM
Maybe it was a bobcat? :bash: :chuckle: :chuckle:I seen a bobcat last night :chuckle: just right outside the city limits in roy. No doubt about it....
what a crock.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 04:53:08 PM
Yes, even with hunting there will be problems. But less. Where does the majority of hunting pressure originate? Roads and populated areas. You would see the most pressure for wolf hunting in accessible areas, which would allow wolves to thrive in more remote habitats. Now, I'm pretty sure a remote habitat wouldn't include, for example, the gentleman's porch where the most recent incident occured. As of now, the burden is the managing agency's responsibility. If reasonable population managment plans are put into action, then it can be revisited. But the reason we employ wildlife management officials is to be stewards, not overlords of the wildlife populations. Any other wild critter attacking you or your pet could be killed; that is not the case currently with wolves, and they are fairly brazen from my interactions. A few bullets to make them tuck their tail and run wouldn't be bad for any party involved.
Maybe I should ask, do you think the state can AFFORD to compensate every single person who has any kind of wildlife damage done to their property?
I don't. Whether it's elk, deer, bears, cougars, or wolves. People need to take care if themselves and not rely on the government for everything.
That's the thing.. if they aren't liable for the damages, the realized cost of having wolves in the state lies on the people that most likely don't want them there in the first place.. Can't afford to pay out? Open a hunting season! You're putting the burden on those that would prefer to manage the numbers by hunting. Since hunting isn't allowed, the burden should be placed on those that are restricting the ability to manage numbers and problem animals. :twocents:
Even with hunting, there will be problems. They're being hunted in Idaho now, correct? Have wolves stopped killing livestock and pets since the wolf season opened?
You say the burden should be placed on those who are restricting the ability to manage wolves.... so how do we identify who those particular individuals are? And if that's possible, do we then take deductions out of those people's paychecks and place it into a "wolf victim" fund?
Just wondering how all those in favor of wolves are going to be required to pay, while all of us who don't want wolves don't have to pay.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 05:04:41 PM
Wolf numbers have not yet reached what the plan calls for, not even close.
So I'd expect for these types of issues to get much worse as time goes on. This is only the beginning.
I certainly agree with the latter part of this statement. As for the wolf numbers... they are highly underestimated/confirmed.
If a plain jane like myself and her significant other can go out and have ... 4 wolf pack sightings in the last 2 years ranging from the Blues to the Sawtooths... with at least 2 unaccounted packs, there's a lot more out there than the state knows about or is willing to release information on. Most likely a combination of the two.
I've seen wolves 30 miles apart up the Methow this winter... days apart. Still just the lookout pack? *rolls eyes*. Texas Creek, Gold Creek, Golden Doe, Finley Canyon. Two sides of the highway.
hirshey, please post all your sightings (any type) in the wolf topic on here to help us keep WDFW accountable and post them on the WDFW wolf sightings page if you haven't already done that.
I had a good phone discussion with Donny Martorello in Olympia a while ago and he said they will be looking at the okanogan this year for more wolves. He also told me they are looking at the areas where they get the most sightings reported, so it's imperative that we get as many sightings reported as possible.
I am putting together another letter that will better detail my conversation that I will post here when finished.
Bearpaw, I will. Sorry I've been MIA for a while. :)
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 05:09:11 PM
Quote
Yes, even with hunting there will be problems. But less. Where does the majority of hunting pressure originate? Roads and populated areas. You would see the most pressure for wolf hunting in accessible areas, which would allow wolves to thrive in more remote habitats. Now, I'm pretty sure a remote habitat wouldn't include, for example, the gentleman's porch where the most recent incident occured. As of now, the burden is the managing agency's responsibility. If reasonable population managment plans are put into action, then it can be revisited. But the reason we employ wildlife management officials is to be stewards, not overlords of the wildlife populations. Any other wild critter attacking you or your pet could be killed; that is not the case currently with wolves, and they are fairly brazen from my interactions. A few bullets to make them tuck their tail and run wouldn't be bad for any party involved.
I certainly agree with all of that, but I do feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect our state to already have a hunting season for wolves. Look how long it took Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming before they were able to institute a season on wolves. Why should we expect for that to happen any sooner here? If anything, I would expect the opposite, with all the wolf lovers we have in this state.
Post by: Curly on March 13, 2013, 05:13:10 PM
QuoteYes, even with hunting there will be problems. But less. Where does the majority of hunting pressure originate? Roads and populated areas. You would see the most pressure for wolf hunting in accessible areas, which would allow wolves to thrive in more remote habitats. Now, I'm pretty sure a remote habitat wouldn't include, for example, the gentleman's porch where the most recent incident occured. As of now, the burden is the managing agency's responsibility. If reasonable population managment plans are put into action, then it can be revisited. But the reason we employ wildlife management officials is to be stewards, not overlords of the wildlife populations. Any other wild critter attacking you or your pet could be killed; that is not the case currently with wolves, and they are fairly brazen from my interactions. A few bullets to make them tuck their tail and run wouldn't be bad for any party involved.
I certainly agree with all of that, but I do feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect our state to already have a hunting season for wolves. Look how long it took Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming before they were able to institute a season on wolves. Why should we expect for that to happen any sooner here? If anything, I would expect the opposite, with all the wolf lovers we have in this state.
Our state should have had the benefit of learning from those other states' mistakes. Wolves definitely should have been delisted by the state as soon as the Feds gave the ok.
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 05:16:02 PM
QuoteYes, even with hunting there will be problems. But less. Where does the majority of hunting pressure originate? Roads and populated areas. You would see the most pressure for wolf hunting in accessible areas, which would allow wolves to thrive in more remote habitats. Now, I'm pretty sure a remote habitat wouldn't include, for example, the gentleman's porch where the most recent incident occured. As of now, the burden is the managing agency's responsibility. If reasonable population managment plans are put into action, then it can be revisited. But the reason we employ wildlife management officials is to be stewards, not overlords of the wildlife populations. Any other wild critter attacking you or your pet could be killed; that is not the case currently with wolves, and they are fairly brazen from my interactions. A few bullets to make them tuck their tail and run wouldn't be bad for any party involved.
I certainly agree with all of that, but I do feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect our state to already have a hunting season for wolves. Look how long it took Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming before they were able to institute a season on wolves. Why should we expect for that to happen any sooner here? If anything, I would expect the opposite, with all the wolf lovers we have in this state.
There are enough wolves in the NE corner to delist already, that's why we wanted to share them with you. :tup:
Post by: KFhunter on March 13, 2013, 05:23:05 PM
QuoteYes, even with hunting there will be problems. But less. Where does the majority of hunting pressure originate? Roads and populated areas. You would see the most pressure for wolf hunting in accessible areas, which would allow wolves to thrive in more remote habitats. Now, I'm pretty sure a remote habitat wouldn't include, for example, the gentleman's porch where the most recent incident occured. As of now, the burden is the managing agency's responsibility. If reasonable population managment plans are put into action, then it can be revisited. But the reason we employ wildlife management officials is to be stewards, not overlords of the wildlife populations. Any other wild critter attacking you or your pet could be killed; that is not the case currently with wolves, and they are fairly brazen from my interactions. A few bullets to make them tuck their tail and run wouldn't be bad for any party involved.
I certainly agree with all of that, but I do feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect our state to already have a hunting season for wolves. Look how long it took Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming before they were able to institute a season on wolves. Why should we expect for that to happen any sooner here? If anything, I would expect the opposite, with all the wolf lovers we have in this state.
Problem is the Wolf lovers in key decision making positions within WDFW
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 05:24:25 PM
QuoteYes, even with hunting there will be problems. But less. Where does the majority of hunting pressure originate? Roads and populated areas. You would see the most pressure for wolf hunting in accessible areas, which would allow wolves to thrive in more remote habitats. Now, I'm pretty sure a remote habitat wouldn't include, for example, the gentleman's porch where the most recent incident occured. As of now, the burden is the managing agency's responsibility. If reasonable population managment plans are put into action, then it can be revisited. But the reason we employ wildlife management officials is to be stewards, not overlords of the wildlife populations. Any other wild critter attacking you or your pet could be killed; that is not the case currently with wolves, and they are fairly brazen from my interactions. A few bullets to make them tuck their tail and run wouldn't be bad for any party involved.
I certainly agree with all of that, but I do feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect our state to already have a hunting season for wolves. Look how long it took Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming before they were able to institute a season on wolves. Why should we expect for that to happen any sooner here? If anything, I would expect the opposite, with all the wolf lovers we have in this state.
I think if the population of wolves present in the state was more accurate and the locality did not matter, we'd have at least a small controlled hunt already. As I've already stated.. Blue mountains (before they indicated a pack), Sawtooths, multiple Methow Valley locations... if only a couple of people can have so many interactions, there are a substantial amount out there. The challenge in this state is certainly the wolves location and the location of the majority of the persons strongly desiring wolves in the ecosystem. I think it would be hard to keep a positive outlook on wolves if you fully immersed yourself in the life of a cattleman, outfitter, hound hunter, or pet owner that has seen firsthand the effects these critters can produce. Wolves are here. They're going to be; I don't doubt or fight that fact, but I will resist the notion that my neighbor, the local postal worker or school teacher, the rancher, or anyone else living in areas most affected should either have to move, build fences, or bear the costs of this type of predator all their own. :twocents:
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 05:37:23 PM
http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586 (http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586)
Post by: bobcat on March 13, 2013, 05:53:45 PM
In 2009 when WDFW bought the rest of the Golden Doe ranch, the first thing they did was release wolves on it. And the first thing their wolves did was kill a cow and a calf.
Source?
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on March 13, 2013, 06:24:29 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 13, 2013, 06:38:32 PM
Full story here..
http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586 (http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586)
Thanks hirshey, glad to see something in print besides just the story on here. Sort of validifies the story for the naysayers. :tup:
Post by: Jingles on March 13, 2013, 06:55:11 PM
Post by: Dan-o on March 13, 2013, 07:07:05 PM
What a bunch of arrogant hypocrites to say that other people should have them in their back yard, but not take them into their own back yard.
I'd laugh way out loud if that state senator's bill got some traction.
Post by: HornHoarder on March 13, 2013, 07:46:31 PM
Post by: Ridgeratt on March 13, 2013, 07:53:22 PM
I havent read all 15 pages, but when did Bobcat become a wolf lover :dunno: Seems like he has been trying to defend them, and the WDFW this entire thread.
Horn Hoader your the man!! :kneel:
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 13, 2013, 07:58:56 PM
In 2009 when WDFW bought the rest of the Golden Doe ranch, the first thing they did was release wolves on it. And the first thing their wolves did was kill a cow and a calf.
Source?
Read it slower....you may see it
Post by: Special T on March 13, 2013, 08:00:48 PM
Post by: CastleRocker on March 13, 2013, 08:14:12 PM
The state has always paid for crop damage due to elk/deer. They also will pay for damage by beavers if it is documented properly. They give out damage control permits for elk that eat too much hay and alfalfa, and for bears that eat too many apples/pears.
I'm sure they will eventually also pay for any vet bills, and any and all livestock damage done by wolves.
I should say, "we the taxpayers of this state" will pay. Heck we bought and planted these non-native wolf species in the first place!
It's almost time to move back to AK.
Post by: wolfbait on March 13, 2013, 08:32:34 PM
John said a USFS guy said he had heard it was a cougar attack also, John told him what I just told you. The USFS guy said when he finds out who switch this attack from a wolf to a cougar he would make sure whoever was responsible would be looking for a new job. :yike:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitkin can always go to work for Conservation NW full time, and then there's Defenders of wolflies which seem to like people who use to work for the USFWS.
Post by: CastleRocker on March 13, 2013, 08:34:40 PM
Post by: smdave on March 13, 2013, 08:42:28 PM
Full story here..
http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586 (http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586)
Thanks hirshey, glad to see something in print besides just the story on here. Sort of validifies the story for the naysayers. :tup:
Yeah because it was not posted on page 14 reply #202
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 08:51:38 PM
Full story here..
http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586 (http://www.methowvalleynews.com/story.php?id=9586)
Thanks hirshey, glad to see something in print besides just the story on here. Sort of validifies the story for the naysayers. :tup:
Yeah because it was not posted on page 14 reply #202
Easy on the sarcasim! I generally like mine with a side of playfulness or jest. :hello:
Didn't see the article from Omak, thanks for posting.
Post by: hirshey on March 13, 2013, 08:52:20 PM
I just got off the phone with John Stevie, he told me that Donny Martorello called him today. Donny said he had heard at first that it was a cougar attack, but now he knows for sure that it was a wolf attack. He also said that they would be paying John's vet bill on his dog. He said they didn't have funds yet for taking care of wolf attacks on domestic pets but that they would be working on it. Donny was real polite and said he was sorry this had happened to his dog. He also said he knew that the Methow Valley had more wolves then was being reported.
John said a USFS guy said he had heard it was a cougar attack also, John told him what I just told you. The USFS guy said when he finds out who switch this attack from a wolf to a cougar he would make sure whoever was responsible would be looking for a new job. :yike:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitkin can always go to work for Conservation NW full time, and then there's Defenders of wolflies which seem to like people who use to work for the USFWS.
Great info, thanks for sharing!
Post by: Curly on March 13, 2013, 08:59:58 PM
I haven't read all 15 pages, but when did Bobcat become a wolf lover :dunno: Seems like he has been trying to defend them, and the WDFW this entire thread.
I can say for sure Bobcat is no wolf lover. WDFW and the commission both dropped the ball on the wolf issue and I know he agrees that the wolf plan is bad........
If he can be convinced that the State had anything to do with reintroducing wolves, I know he will change his tune. I will have to re-read wolfbait's post and links and see if I can see where it says that WDFW introduced wolves.
(Sometimes I think he just enjoys an argument). :twocents: :chuckle:
Post by: mkcj on March 13, 2013, 09:51:34 PM
So here is my take on this, My experience with wolves are only from moose hunting in Canada for many years with my dad and his stories, He hunted 42 years in a row with our friend Tommy a first nation guide. A full grown moose or horse are no match for a wolf pack Tommy (our friend/guide) lost many many horses over the years to wolves but no one lived where we hunted. My experience in the valley is rather short compared to others here we have only had our place here for 46 years, But the difference in the 2 places are worlds apart in wolf terms, In the valley during the winter months the wolf's main food supply (mule deer) are driven down to the valley floor right into people's back yards like it or not, Now right now there are 2 wolf's in the area ( if you believe WDFW) what will it be like when there are 30-50 living around Twisp? Remember all their food is in your back yard 4-5 months a year. The valley is not like Montana or Wyoming! My boys and I hunt on a 100,000 acre ranch in Wyoming each year. How many ranch's in the valley are there like that with vast acres of nothing but grass and cattle (along with 1000's of Deer and Antelope)? 0! This Man's pet is only the start, It's too bad the deer where just coming back into some healthy number's here!
Post by: Smossy on March 13, 2013, 10:59:14 PM
Post by: boneaddict on March 14, 2013, 06:14:14 AM
Good to know they are going to take care of him Wolfbait. Make sure you keep "wolfbait" fenced on your front porch becasue it is your responsibility you know. :rolleyes:
Post by: villageidiot on March 14, 2013, 06:57:09 AM
Post by: bearpaw on March 14, 2013, 06:59:41 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on March 14, 2013, 07:08:24 AM
Post by: Northway on March 14, 2013, 09:04:16 AM
I hate to say it but it almost appears that WDFW or more specifically Donny Moratello is trying to rebuild the credibility of the department. I believe he made the call to take out the Wedge Pack and now he has come forward extremely fast and investigated this dog attack and confirmed it was a wolf. Don't forget that he is getting hammered by thousands of bunny huggers but he might actually be trying to do the right thing instead of appease the greenies for once. WDFW over the past few years has severely hurt their reputation by not responding and trying to sweep all the wolf reports under the table. It seems at present they are at an all time low on public (hunters and ranchers) opinion and trust. I think we need to give WDFW or more especially Donny some credit for taking a stand and stepping up to the plate. I can't imagine how many of the greenies have called them about taking out the Wedge Pack and they are standing their ground and in fact are saying they may have to do it again. Put yourself in their shoes and see how much hatred they are getting for actually doing something that works. Now if they would come forward and support this law that was passed in the house to allow pet owners and livestock owners to shoot a wolf for attacking their animals this would be a enormous step to restoring our trust in their intentions. I do believe they are starting to get our attention so lets see what road they take. Just sayin!
He could have stated that more firmly in Seattle, but I don't recall that he did. I felt that spent too much time trying to paint the Wedge Pack as a hiccup. I don't think it would have been out of bounds for him to let a pro wolf crowd know in so many words that supporting wolves in WA also means supporting some level of wolf management; that there is really no other realistic alternative.
Post by: mulehunter on March 14, 2013, 10:11:22 AM
We will not forget the last moment of hunt with Blue and Bonnie. :(
Picture of Bonnie (Black/Tan) is a Great hunter dog!!!! She died by Lookout Pack because we all were there.
Pic of Blue Head wound got healed thur few months later and damn infection all over head/ear very thick of infection kept getting worse and trying treatment every week for long time and couldnt stop infection from spread and he died in kennel. He was awesome hunter dog.
Evidence Picture of Wolf captured on trailcamera by buddy's ranch up Twisp in April 2008 thats where turn loose hounds on cougar appox 1/2 mile same hill. And owner of two white Great Pyrenees got killed by Lookout pack on "same road" a house behind the picture appox 1/2 mile right of the picture. The owner has moved! Since Its obviouly Wolves has done damaged to all livestock, pets.
Post by: AspenBud on March 14, 2013, 11:36:44 AM
The problem I see is that people who don't live in wolf country read articles like the ones below and see no difference. To the average city dweller or Joe Six Pack whose idea of getting out is watching a football game the outdoors are simply a scary and dangerous place so what's one more predator? Bluntly put, I think it's more a matter of most people not knowing about the problem or for that matter caring. Out of site and out of mind.
http://www.huntthewest.com/updates2009/WAlion.php (http://www.huntthewest.com/updates2009/WAlion.php)
http://trappingtoday.com/index.php/2010/11/24/coyote-killing-spree-in-washington-town/ (http://trappingtoday.com/index.php/2010/11/24/coyote-killing-spree-in-washington-town/)
http://tdn.com/news/local/cascade-way-resident-warns-neighbors-after-seeing-coyote-kill-dog/article_d5d68fd6-6a77-11e1-ba51-0019bb2963f4.html (http://tdn.com/news/local/cascade-way-resident-warns-neighbors-after-seeing-coyote-kill-dog/article_d5d68fd6-6a77-11e1-ba51-0019bb2963f4.html)
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4811654&page=1 (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4811654&page=1)
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/08/texas-boy-6-reportedly-snatched-by-mountain-lion-at-big-bend-national-park/ (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/08/texas-boy-6-reportedly-snatched-by-mountain-lion-at-big-bend-national-park/)
http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/local/northeast/mountain-lion-kills-familys-dog (http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/local/northeast/mountain-lion-kills-familys-dog)
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/mountain-lion-attacks-california-biker-body-found-nearby (http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/mountain-lion-attacks-california-biker-body-found-nearby)
http://voices.yahoo.com/mountain-lion-invades-home-mauls-dog-colorado-1774327.html (http://voices.yahoo.com/mountain-lion-invades-home-mauls-dog-colorado-1774327.html)
http://www.realaspen.com/article/876/Mountain-lion-attacks-and-kills-pet-dog-near-Sunlight-ski-area-cougar-also-spotted-in-Carbondale (http://www.realaspen.com/article/876/Mountain-lion-attacks-and-kills-pet-dog-near-Sunlight-ski-area-cougar-also-spotted-in-Carbondale)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x650305 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x650305)
http://abcnews.go.com/US/mountain-lion-attacks-man-63-california/story?id=16699470 (http://abcnews.go.com/US/mountain-lion-attacks-man-63-california/story?id=16699470)
http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/Mountain-lion-killed-after-attack-on-dog/-/14594602/15939260/-/6u835xz/-/index.html (http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/Mountain-lion-killed-after-attack-on-dog/-/14594602/15939260/-/6u835xz/-/index.html)
http://sierramadre.patch.com/articles/mountain-lion-kills-small-dog-reportedly-attacks-other-animals (http://sierramadre.patch.com/articles/mountain-lion-kills-small-dog-reportedly-attacks-other-animals)
http://www.thenewstribune.com/2013/03/08/2504747/cougar-kills-dog-in-cle-elum-yard.html (http://www.thenewstribune.com/2013/03/08/2504747/cougar-kills-dog-in-cle-elum-yard.html)
http://www.standard.net/stories/2013/01/30/3-mountain-lions-killed-after-attacking-dogs-near-park-city (http://www.standard.net/stories/2013/01/30/3-mountain-lions-killed-after-attacking-dogs-near-park-city)
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2013086837_bearmaul07m.html (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2013086837_bearmaul07m.html)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192766,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192766,00.html)
http://klfd1410.com/news/minnesota-news/bear-snacking-at-backyard-bird-feeder-kills-family-dog-in-sherburne-county-2-2012/ (http://klfd1410.com/news/minnesota-news/bear-snacking-at-backyard-bird-feeder-kills-family-dog-in-sherburne-county-2-2012/)
http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2927108&page=all (http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2927108&page=all)
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/monroe-county-woman-mauled-by-bear-while-protecting-her-dog-from-attack-1.1231275 (http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/monroe-county-woman-mauled-by-bear-while-protecting-her-dog-from-attack-1.1231275)
http://www.thedogfiles.com/2011/08/18/dog-was-culprit-and-savior-in-washington-bear-attack/ (http://www.thedogfiles.com/2011/08/18/dog-was-culprit-and-savior-in-washington-bear-attack/)
http://www.krem.com/news/northwest-news/Mountain-lion-attacks-dog-in-Idaho-175291891.html (http://www.krem.com/news/northwest-news/Mountain-lion-attacks-dog-in-Idaho-175291891.html)
http://www.inquisitr.com/464241/coyotes-attack-man-2012-kent-washington-video/ (http://www.inquisitr.com/464241/coyotes-attack-man-2012-kent-washington-video/)
Post by: Alchase on March 14, 2013, 12:26:00 PM
In 2009 when WDFW bought the rest of the Golden Doe ranch, the first thing they did was release wolves on it. And the first thing their wolves did was kill a cow and a calf.
Source?
Read it slower....you may see it
OK I will bite - No offense to Wolfbait , I enjoy reading his wolf posts and he is obviously living in the middle of something that is not on the up and up when it comes to this state and wolves. There are state employees (Mr. Fitkin) who have not credibility to the common hunter, at least all the ones I know.
Having said that, is there any documented verifiable proof that wolves have ever been reintroduced in Washington State? :dunno:
If so please post it here!
We All have seen evidence of wolves throughout the Methow for years. Just by the locations and sheer numbers it would seem to be obvious there is a substantially larger population of wolves then the state is acknowledging.
If there is verifiable proof that wolves were reintroduced in Washington state, I believe that would be a total game changer.
Yet to date, in the seven years of Hunting-Washington, I have yet to see anything that would be considered verifiable proof of reintroduction.
Honestly I would love to see it, that would prove beyond a doubt, that we have been lied to from day one, which we may believe, but without that proof we are just blowing smoke.
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2013, 12:34:18 PM
So no, wolves have not been introduced in this state.
They DID release them in Idaho, and other states. Was that a secret? No it was not. And it wouldn't be kept secret here either. That would be illegal.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 14, 2013, 12:47:28 PM
The penalties for ignoring the set procedures for relocating wildlife are both criminal and civil, state and federal. They would require the immediate dismissal from government employment of the people involved and legal proceeding would then happen. No one in government, especially someone who's been in their job for any extended period of time, would risk the backlash of such a stupid move. It just wouldn't happen.
Post by: SGTDuffman on March 14, 2013, 12:51:59 PM
Post by: Curly on March 14, 2013, 01:03:35 PM
It is a shame that a Bill like that is necessary.........should already be lawful to protect a person's livestock and pets from any predators. :twocents:
Post by: Alchase on March 14, 2013, 01:07:56 PM
That is what I believe to be the case as well. There is a substantial population that post here that believe otherwise.
I was giving them the opportunity to bring out what "evidence" the have of wolf reintroduction.
If any was available.
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2013, 01:12:03 PM
Bobcat and pianoman9701,
That is what I believe to be the case as well. There is a substantial population that post here that believe otherwise.
I was giving them the opportunity to bring out what "evidence" the have of wolf reintroduction.
If any was available.
I'd like to see that evidence as well.
Post by: boneaddict on March 14, 2013, 01:34:14 PM
I smiled when bearpaw told the story about the woman seeing a collared wolf in her backyard several times and at the meeting they finally admitted that they had one in that area.
Lets see, I also saw collared wolves around Grand Coulee a couple years ago, but those didn't exist either.
I was tracked by a dozen up in Sherman two years ago, and the tribe just finally confirmed them. I could go on and on for those of you that don't get out much. Its refreshing to hear Hirsheys account, because she gets it. Man is not necessarily the apex predator he thinks he might be when on their terms.
Post by: AspenBud on March 14, 2013, 01:35:17 PM
http://www.koinlocal6.com/news/local/story/WOLF-MANAGEMENT/SZOAa1tycUeoN9R6SygMOw.cspx (http://www.koinlocal6.com/news/local/story/WOLF-MANAGEMENT/SZOAa1tycUeoN9R6SygMOw.cspx)
"Bill opponents say it would hurt the state's wolf recovery efforts and contradicts years of effort put into hashing out a state wolf plan."
I disagree with this quote for a couple of reasons.
For one, it's ludicrous. If a person's kid is under threat or attack or if a hunter has a dog on the ground they should most certainly have a right to defend either as well as themselves. If that does not become law soon it should become a ballot initiative.
The other reason is I find how WDFW is handling the situation to be poorly done in regards to acknowledging whether wolves are present or not. Every single day that they say no wolves exist west of the mountains in this or that area is another day that someone can pick one off and say it was just a big coyote. While that might be a good thing, it doesn't speed their wolf recovery plan (love it or hate it) along and makes people living with them more and more frustrated. It would be far more helpful if the state simply acknowledged that they may and/or do exist everywhere in this state.
A natural migration of wolves west might take a while. With about 2 million people in King County alone you have a lot of pet dogs spreading a ring of parvo and other canine diseases around, more cars to hit them, fewer places to hide, and frankly more people willing to shoot shovel and shut up. To the best of my knowledge, we've never seen wolves near a major population center like King County in any of the areas they have recovered, what will happen is hard to predict but my bet is they won't adapt as well as coyotes. Once they get a foothold it won't take long for them to spread, but getting that toe hold might be harder than you think.
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2013, 01:58:36 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 14, 2013, 02:09:35 PM
Wolves with collars doesn't prove the government transplanted those wolves there. Maybe they were already there, when they were collared. Maybe they got collared somewhere else (Canada?) and moved to Washington on their own. Im not sure why a collared wolf is seen as proof that the state put them there.
The DFW and USFWS are still trapping and collaring wolves and will continue to do so.
Post by: mulehunter on March 14, 2013, 02:10:04 PM
Dear Scott,
Rep Shea believes that unless we take aggressive steps to control the wolf population now, it will balloon out of control. Jim Beers (link) has said to me that unless more that 30% of the actual population is harvested every year, the population will continue to increase. And that does not account for immigrating loners etc.
Unfortunately, unless the WDFW makes a radical correction in their course, the wolf population in WA State will soon be completely out of control.
Thank you for your letter.
Warm regards,
Jim Robinson
Legislative Assistant to
Matt Shea
State Representative
4th Legislative District
Dear Scott,
Thank you writing in to share your support for SB 5187. The House companion, HB 1191, did not receive a vote out of committee in February, and was not able to be considered by the full House before last evening’s cutoff. Currently, SB 5187 is scheduled to receive a public hearing in the House Agriculture and Natural Recourses Committee. As a member of that committee, I look forward to hearing the testimony, and having a further discussion with my colleagues on this important issue.
Please take time to write or call whenever you have a comment, a question or an idea to share. We are always pleased to be of assistance.
Very Truly Yours,
Drew MacEwen
State Representative
35th Legislative District
Scott,
I support giving landowners/ranchers the ability to protect the livestock they are required to assure are cared for humanely. I oppose wolves even being in our state and will continue to support legislation/policies that protect citizens and their families, pets, and livestock from predation by all wild carnivores.
Ed
Representative Ed Orcutt
20th Legislative District
Post by: bearpaw on March 14, 2013, 02:32:44 PM
Post by: mkcj on March 14, 2013, 05:05:38 PM
Post by: Special T on March 14, 2013, 05:17:01 PM
It is high time we let our State reps know our feeling on this issue and make sure to refernce the bill, and the pic and actilces in the paper. :twocents:
Post by: grundy53 on March 14, 2013, 05:33:43 PM
Bobcat I think the issue with the collars on wolves is a matter of TRUST. It does not prove they were released but it does prove the WDFW has NOT been honest and forthcoming about wolf issues. This matter of trust is not an isolated event when it comes to this department. I would state that MANY people, here and elsewhere, don't do a great job at making the specific destinctions of actions. What Collars does prove is the we are dealing with an agency that is not honest, is not dealing in a transparent manner and is NOT a friend to sportsmen OR those in the rural areas that this is going on.:yeah:
It is high time we let our State reps know our feeling on this issue and make sure to refernce the bill, and the pic and actilces in the paper. :twocents:
Post by: bigtex on March 14, 2013, 05:38:44 PM
Wolves with collars doesn't prove the government transplanted those wolves there. Maybe they were already there, when they were collared. Maybe they got collared somewhere else (Canada?) and moved to Washington on their own. Im not sure why a collared wolf is seen as proof that the state put them there.
WDFW puts collars on ALL animals. They even have transponders on Western Pond Turtles.
Not every animal WDFW releases gets a collar. There are tons of animals that are tranquilized, collared, and released in the same exact spot.
King 5 just did a story of WDFW and USFS trapping a Wolverine in the North Cascades, they trapped, tranquilized, and released it in the same location.
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2013, 05:43:40 PM
If you're saying they weren't honest in regards to specific locations of wolves they may have known about, and which may or may not have had collars, why would they give the public this information?
It's just like with spotted owls. Do you think the state should report known locations of nesting spotted owls, and have some nutcase with a shotgun go in and kill them?
The same thing would happen with wolves. I can see why they'd want to keep some of that information to themselves. Doing otherwise would be irresponsible.
Post by: grundy53 on March 14, 2013, 05:50:28 PM
Wolves with collars doesn't prove the government transplanted those wolves there. Maybe they were already there, when they were collared. Maybe they got collared somewhere else (Canada?) and moved to Washington on their own. Im not sure why a collared wolf is seen as proof that the state put them there.
WDFW puts collars on ALL animals. They even have transponders on Western Pond Turtles.
Not every animal WDFW releases gets a collar. There are tons of animals that are tranquilized, collared, and released in the same exact spot.
King 5 just did a story of WDFW and USFS trapping a Wolverine in the North Cascades, they trapped, tranquilized, and released it in the same location.
Yeah but they don't deny the pond turtles exist in that pond when someone reports a sighting, or try to tell them it was actually a box turtle...
Post by: snowpack on March 14, 2013, 06:04:40 PM
What is it they haven't been honest about? If you're saying they denied the existence of wolves in north central Washington, that's not true. There were notices posted in the National Forest at least since the late 80's that said there were wolves in the area, and asked people to report any sightings.Spotted owls don't pose a danger to people/pets/livestock. They could use the collar information for public safety like they do the elk collars. When collared elk get too close to a highway, (since elk are usually in a herd they pose a real threat to motorists) the collars activate road warnings and messages are sent to personnel. Similarly wolves often tend to travel in packs and pose danger to rural communities. The collar information from wolves could be used to protect these communities--let people like the dog owner or the rancher know when the collared wolf (and likely the pack) are nearby so they can take extra precautions and redouble deterrents.
If you're saying they weren't honest in regards to specific locations of wolves they may have known about, and which may or may not have had collars, why would they give the public this information?
It's just like with spotted owls. Do you think the state should report known locations of nesting spotted owls, and have some nutcase with a shotgun go in and kill them?
The same thing would happen with wolves. I can see why they'd want to keep some of that information to themselves. Doing otherwise would be irresponsible.
Post by: boneaddict on March 14, 2013, 06:44:13 PM
Wolves with collars doesn't prove the government transplanted those wolves there. Maybe they were already there, when they were collared. Maybe they got collared somewhere else (Canada?) and moved to Washington on their own. Im not sure why a collared wolf is seen as proof that the state put them there.
WOW Bocat, you really think outside of the box don't you. It has to do with denial, you know, there aren't wolves here and confirmation or the lack there of. :chuckle: I am glad you take them for their word and believe everything the government tells you. :chuckle:
Post by: Special T on March 14, 2013, 06:46:21 PM
What is it they haven't been honest about? If you're saying they denied the existence of wolves in north central Washington, that's not true. There were notices posted in the National Forest at least since the late 80's that said there were wolves in the area, and asked people to report any sightings.Well They have not been honest about the impact wolves have on the environment. It does not take a rocket scientist to see what has happened around Yellowstone and ID to game and cattle. I think they Lie to us, as well as them selves. They are either too arrogant to the same kinds of things could happen here, because they do such a great job at mgt, OR they are too stupid.
If you're saying they weren't honest in regards to specific locations of wolves they may have known about, and which may or may not have had collars, why would they give the public this information?
It's just like with spotted owls. Do you think the state should report known locations of nesting spotted owls, and have some nutcase with a shotgun go in and kill them?
The same thing would happen with wolves. I can see why they'd want to keep some of that information to themselves. Doing otherwise would be irresponsible.
I'm always so amazed that people like your self have not made the mental leap of the source in this problem. YOU state that the wolves have been in the NC since the 80's..... From what geographic region has this wolf problem come from? Has it been North to south or East to west? While i do not have proof that wolves were planted in WA We do know that wolves have been planted in YNP and ID. And THOSE wolves are not from this geographic area...
They have lied (by omission) that subspecies do not matter. We are told that possible sightings are likely Hybrids (of which they have no proof) but we must not shoot them because they MIGHT be wolves... We are told that a wolf is a wolf yet there are Mexican red wolves McKenzie Canadian wolves and were Timber wolves indigenous tot he PNW but whatever wolves we have now will suffice.
When My child lies to me over and over, I do not believe her on her first declaration. I get my Arse up out of my chair to make sure her room is clean or her homework is done. Trust is MUCH harder to earn back than to keep. If YOU think the WDFW is SOOO deserving of my trust, and other hunters, please tell what great things they have done for us.... I personally can only think of a couple of instances where the WDFW has gotten thier crap together to do things that are simple fixes and make common sense... :twocents:
Post by: cougarbart on March 14, 2013, 07:26:47 PM
Post by: mountainman on March 14, 2013, 07:54:29 PM
Post by: husky270 on March 14, 2013, 08:12:53 PM
Post by: seth30 on March 14, 2013, 08:15:19 PM
Keep us posted on your dogs recovery hope shes ok. Thats hitting a little to close to home cant beleive they tried to switch you up on a cougar attack thats some serious denial, hard to sweep a wolf under the carpet . bs :bash::yeah: kudos to your other dog for stopping the attack!
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2013, 08:16:14 PM
Keep us posted on your dogs recovery hope shes ok. Thats hitting a little to close to home cant beleive they tried to switch you up on a cougar attack thats some serious denial, hard to sweep a wolf under the carpet . bs :bash:
I think they just questioned him as to if it could have been a cougar, and when he said no, he was postive it was a wolf, that was the end of that. I would have asked the same question.
Post by: AspenBud on March 14, 2013, 08:26:56 PM
well the other problem and im giving the wdfw a little excuse, I really don't believe they have much of an idea about anything with the wolf! and i believe all of us are the same way! what i mean is we don't know what kind of interaction with washington the wolf is gonna have! We think they will feed off ungulates and they shy away from human interaction but since the variables change for every region there is really no telling what is going to happen! 30 years ago if someone seen a moose it was a big deal, now we see them regularly, studys show they will be gone in less than 4 years! Heard a tidbit that 5 moose where collared this fall and by feb 15, 3 of the 5 were wolf food! My guess like idaho is moose will be first then elk and deer! It will be interesting what happens in areas that don't have moose or elk? that would be a different variable!lol wdfw doesn't know and neither does anyone else whats gonna happen but hungry large predator with little food usually means bad things for something!
Good post.
The fact that their population is exploding says they have a lot of food available.
I said this in another thread on here and I stand by it, first they'll take the ungulate population way down, then they'll starve, ungulates will recover (not to their prior numbers), and the cycle will start again, but much less extreme since diminished prey numbers will lead to lower pup survival.
Bottom line, big game hunting is going to take a big hit in this state for a while unless hunting is opened on them. Meanwhile they've let a bunch of apex predators into the equivilant of an all you can eat kitchen. One way or another the wolves will have to start paying for those meals, the only question is will it be through starvation or hunting. At the moment I think the WDFW is choosing starvation, how "humane."
Post by: bigtex on March 14, 2013, 08:28:39 PM
What is it they haven't been honest about? If you're saying they denied the existence of wolves in north central Washington, that's not true. There were notices posted in the National Forest at least since the late 80's that said there were wolves in the area, and asked people to report any sightings.Spotted owls don't pose a danger to people/pets/livestock. They could use the collar information for public safety like they do the elk collars. When collared elk get too close to a highway, (since elk are usually in a herd they pose a real threat to motorists) the collars activate road warnings and messages are sent to personnel. Similarly wolves often tend to travel in packs and pose danger to rural communities. The collar information from wolves could be used to protect these communities--let people like the dog owner or the rancher know when the collared wolf (and likely the pack) are nearby so they can take extra precautions and redouble deterrents.
If you're saying they weren't honest in regards to specific locations of wolves they may have known about, and which may or may not have had collars, why would they give the public this information?
It's just like with spotted owls. Do you think the state should report known locations of nesting spotted owls, and have some nutcase with a shotgun go in and kill them?
The same thing would happen with wolves. I can see why they'd want to keep some of that information to themselves. Doing otherwise would be irresponsible.
A lot more people would rather just go shoot the wolf then they would an elk :twocents:
Post by: wolfbait on March 14, 2013, 08:59:32 PM
Re: WOLF ATTACKS LOCAL DOG, TWISP, WA
First off, I am not a "Wolf Hate Monger" by any means.
Two weeks ago while walking with my wife on the Twisp Carlton Hwy 3 /1/2 miles north of Carlton, a Black Wolf crossed the Highway in the pursuit of a Whitetail Doe, not more than 70 Yards in front of us. I was unable to get my I-Phone Camera out in time to get a photo, but I walked up the hillside in the snow and got a clear and excellent picture of its track. I reported this to my neighbor who was out pruning his apply trees closeby, and he stated to us that a Black Wolf attached his Pit Bull Female in Nov. in his yard, and it took 12 stiches in the shoulder area to close the wound by a local Vet. His son fired a shotgun into the air and the Wolf ran away. We live near the Lookout Mtn Pack, and this is the 2nd Wolf we have seen out hiking in two years http://www.methownet.com/bulletinboard.html (http://www.methownet.com/bulletinboard.html)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is one I had't heard of yet, I have several wolf attack reports on pets in the Methow Valley in the last five years, and I am gathering them up now. Why hasn't WDFW put wolf attacks from the Methow Valley on their Dangerous Animal Reports. The wolf attacks I have, have all been reported to WDFW and some of them to the Okanogan County Sheriff department.
WDFW's fat is in the fire right now, and I think they would say anything to get away from the heat. Maybe it's time for a few more wolf attacks that they failed to report hit Mainstream Media of Okanogan county and others that are dealing with the wolves that WDFW refuse to confirm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is really responsible for the game herds in WA.? In the Methow Valley Scott Fitkin comes out with a glowing report of the spring deer count and hunting season in the fall. Why is it that the people who have lived in the Methow Valley for 50 plus years see a different picture? Like today a friend and I took a drive from Twisp down the Twisp/Carlton side just to see how many deer there were. We hit Carlton without seeing one deer, we then drove up Texas creek about seven miles, no deer. We stopped in and visited with Idaboomer for abit,. He told us twenty years ago he would see five hundred plus deer on the hills across from his house when the spring grass came, he said he spent quite a bit if time the other day and only counted 26. We saw TWO deer today and they were lying down behind Cascade Pipe and Supply.
I think WDFW had better either get rid of the People who are making liars out of them, or find a den to hide in, because people are starting to see what an out of control wolf population is all about. Washington state is now ID, MT and Wyoming.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know many of you have trouble believing that WDFW released wolves in the Methow Valley or anywhere else in WA. Right now if I took WDFW to court over their wolf releases in 2009, they would either have to admit they had full knowledge of the release or Scott Fitkin would "probably" have to go to jail.
Post by: h20hunter on March 15, 2013, 07:22:14 AM
http://www.nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/14/wdfw-looking-into-whether-it-can-reimburse-twisp-man-for-dogs-wolf-attack-injuries/ (http://www.nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/14/wdfw-looking-into-whether-it-can-reimburse-twisp-man-for-dogs-wolf-attack-injuries/)
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 15, 2013, 08:19:17 AM
Here is a link to a follow up story that is on Northwest Sportsman....I'd bet you a dollar the "spirited online discussion" is this forum.
http://www.nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/14/wdfw-looking-into-whether-it-can-reimburse-twisp-man-for-dogs-wolf-attack-injuries/ (http://www.nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/14/wdfw-looking-into-whether-it-can-reimburse-twisp-man-for-dogs-wolf-attack-injuries/)
Interesting that the attacked dog was a wolf hybrid. And that the owner is "avowedly anti wolf". But not so avowedly that it kept him from bringing a couple hybrid wolves into his home.
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 09:23:21 AM
WDFW Looking Into Whether It Can Reimburse Twisp Man For Dog’s Wolf-attack Injuries
By Andy Walgamott, on March 14th, 2013
UPDATED 7:15 A.M. MARCH 15, 2013: The Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife is looking into whether it can reimburse a Methow Valley man’s vet bills after acknowledging that his dog was attacked by a wolf early Sunday morning.
John Stevie’s Siberian husky-wolf hybrid mix, Shelby, suffered wounds to the right side of her face in the battle on his porch in the countryside south of Twisp.
“It had her head in its mouth,” Stevie recalls seeing.
Another one of his dogs, an estimated 100-pound male named Lopi and also a hybrid, chased the wolf off, according to Stevie and state fish and wildlife officers.
The initial vet bill was $289, and he’s had to take Shelby back a second time. He says it could run up to $600 or $700.
Since WDFW investigated the attack earlier this week and determined it was indeed a wolf, wildlife managers have been trying to figure out if the agency can legally pay for the injuries.
The wolf management plan does allow payouts for “guarding/herding animals” working with livestock, such as the Martinez sheep company’s dog injured by the Teanaway wolves in 2011. It does not specifically state that reimbursements can be made for domestic animals. It notes that Wisconsin is the only state that pays for injuries to human companion dogs.
However, WDFW does have copies of the vet bill.
There has been spirited discussion online about whether WDFW should pay for the injuries to Shelby or not. As of late Thursday afternoon, we were waiting for final word from a high-ranking wolf manager on that front.
A representative of a wolf advocacy group active in the valley said that philosophically his organization isn’t against pitching in on the vet bill, but hasn’t budgeted for that aspect of wolf management, though they have provided funding for a range rider in another wolf territory where cattle are grazed.
Stevie, a 47-year-old third-generation Methow Valley resident who owns 40 acres at the base of McClure Mountain and is avowedly anti-wolf, said he usually keeps Shelby, inside at night but let her out around 11 p.m. on Saturday to go pee.
“She tells me when she wants to come back in,” he says.
Lopi is kept inside because of his tendency to wander.
Somewhere around 1:30 a.m. Stevie and his partner, Sharon Willowa, were awoken by a “ruckus in the kitchen.”
Running to the scene, he found Lopi “going crazy” trying to get out a French door, and heard Shelby on the deck.
Opening the door, he said he found a “100-plus-pound wolf had the female down.”
Stevie says he didn’t know what to do — but Lopi did.
“The male darted out and attacked it. The wolf jumped off the deck and the male chased it through the creek bottom,” he says.
Within a few hours of reporting the incident, two fish and wildlife officers, Jason Day and Troy McCormick, and wildlife biologist Jeff Heinlen came out late Sunday morning and spent, Stevie estimates, four hours investigating the scene.
“They looked at the tracks and decided it was a wolf,” Stevie says.
A single set of paw prints, measuring 41/2 inches at their widest, led away from the deck, according to a 17-page report by the officers.
AN IMAGE FROM WDFW'S REPORT SHOWS THE WIDTH OF THE ATTACKING WOLF'S TRACK, HIGHLIGHTED WITH A BLACK POWDER TO MAKE IT STAND OUT AGAINST THE SNOW. (WDFW)
Lopi’s tracks were an inch-and-a-half narrower, the report says and a photo inside it indicates.
It says the investigators followed the tracks as best they could across mud, crusted snow, and past compost material that had been recently disturbed and included some old fish bones.
It also describes Shelby as visibly shaken, bleeding from a couple locations and with a puncture wound to the ear; Stevie’s vet later old them the dog had multiple bite wounds to the head, ear and neck.
IMAGES FROM WDFW'S INVESTIGATION SHOW THE LOCATION WHERE THE WOLF HAD THE DOG PINNED AND SHELBY BEFORE BEING TAKEN TO THE VETERINARIAN; FOR IMAGES AFTER THE DOG WAS WORKED ON, SEE METHOWVALLEYNEWS.COM, OMAKCHRONICLE.COM AND HUNTING-WASHINGTON.COM. (WDFW)
An officer said that Stevie described the attacking wolf as “coyote or grayish colored with a very dark side, but not quite black.”
Another WDFW report says that Day, McCormick and Heinlen briefed three other WDFW wolf managers as well as a U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service supervisor and a U.S. Department of Agriculture supervisor before the trio determined on Monday that it was indeed a “confirmed wolf depredation.”
Online, there was some early scuttle that the state employees suggested the dog was attacked by a cougar instead.
Stevie says that they did ask him that question at first, as well as if he thought it had been a domestic animal.
Day’s write-up shows that he was considering the possibility that it was a wolf before he even arrived because he says, knowing of their keen interest in wolf matters, he informed the Okanogan County Sheriff’s Office of the incident on his way to the scene.
The attacking wolf was either one of the two known to live in the Lookout Pack territory — they’d been sighted within a mile of the incident earlier in the year — or a wolf that’s dispersing through the area.
One of the Smackout males, WA 17M, which was collared last summer, was reported at the site of a dumped livestock carcass in the Similkameen Valley about 35 air miles to the north-northeast of Twisp earlier this month, but wears a black coat. Last month, a Teanaway female was spotted about that same distance to the south-southwest between Entiat and Lake Chelan; it’s more gray.
By an unusual coincidence, the attack also came just two days after the state Senate passed a bill that would allow citizens to shoot wolves attacking their livestock or pets anywhere in Washington, and regardless of the predator’s classification on state and federal protections. SB 5187 is now in the House where it will have a hearing on March 20 before the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.
Another bill that cleared the Senate, SB 5193, would allow “WDFW to offer cash, and well as non-cash, compensation … for all wildlife damage to crops, livestock, other property, and mitigating actions.” It also sets the price of a wolf license plate at $50 — as well as other wildlife-themed plates — starting in 2014. It was passed on a 28-21 vote on Wednesday.
As for what’s next with the wolves in the Methow Valley, with last year’s calf depredation on the Thurlow Ranch by the Lookout Pack, WDFW is on the alert.
“We are monitoring closely. We hope it’s not a Wedge situation,” said state wolf manager Donny Martorello.
The key will be whether any wolves switch from natural prey to other sources, as in northern Stevens County with the Wedge Pack last year, as winter winds down and spring begins.
It’s unclear whether any breeding activity occurred here; none did last year, but Martorello points out that there are likely many more wolves than what WDFW knows about roaming the countryside.
He also notes that lessons from the Northern Rockies show that 80 percent of packs stay out of trouble, but those 20 percent that do cause problems need to be dealt with swiftly and aggressively.
For his part, Stevie acknowledges living in the country.
“This is a prime spot for every animal you can imagine. That’s why I have my dogs,” he says.
He also has a 12-year-old.
“I’m just glad it didn’t happen to my son,” he adds.
Wolf attacks on humans have been fleetingly rare in North America in modern times.
But more incidents of this sort, though also rare, will occur as Washington’s wolf population builds. There have also been a number of human-wolf encounters now as well, several of which we’ve chronicled on this blog.
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2012/09/13/republic-area-wolf-dog-standoff-reported/ (http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2012/09/13/republic-area-wolf-dog-standoff-reported/)
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2011/11/10/newspaper-reports-on-unnerving-wolf-encounter-in-lake-chelan-nra/ (http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2011/11/10/newspaper-reports-on-unnerving-wolf-encounter-in-lake-chelan-nra/)
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2012/01/31/hunter-details-another-wolf-encounter-in-kittitas-co/ (http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2012/01/31/hunter-details-another-wolf-encounter-in-kittitas-co/)
And it’s another reminder that wolves aren’t just creatures of the wilderness, and that in the colder months, they’re down with the deer and other game, in the settled valleys.
As the local USFS biologist John Rohrer told us for a story on another area resident’s sightings above Carlton and a BBC crew’s taping of a documentary in the Methow Valley, “People want to think of wolves as a symbol of wilderness and remoteness, but (in winter and spring) they’re right outside people’s doors.”
In this case, that’s where a wolf tangled with a dog.
It’s at least the second WDFW-acknowledged wolf-dog confrontation http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/14/wdfw-looking-into-whether-it-can-reimburse-twisp-man-for-dogs-wolf-attack-injuries/#.UUJvayM95GE.facebook (http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/14/wdfw-looking-into-whether-it-can-reimburse-twisp-man-for-dogs-wolf-attack-injuries/#.UUJvayM95GE.facebook)
:chuckle:
From the information I have this would be attack number seven just in the Methow Valley, all reported to WDFW. I was talking with Joel Krets last night he said he has been receiving info of other attacks also.
It would seem WDFW has a memory problem when it come to reporting wolf problems from around the country to the public. I can see where it might hurt their story of one maybe two wolves in the Methow if the truth were to come out that there are several packs.
Just last summer we had reports of wolf pups sighted in five differrant locations throughout the Methow. We know that in ID, MT and WY wolf packs have been documented to have up to three litters per pack, I'm quite sure that isn't the case in the Methow Valley. I think we need a differrant wolf biologist in the Methow, one that isn't tied to Conservation NW.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 15, 2013, 11:15:15 AM
Sitka-The dog that was attack was a Blue Heeler, John only has one wolf cross dog.
WDFW Looking Into Whether It Can Reimburse Twisp Man For Dog’s Wolf-attack Injuries
By Andy Walgamott, on March 14th, 2013
UPDATED 7:15 A.M. MARCH 15, 2013: The Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife is looking into whether it can reimburse a Methow Valley man’s vet bills after acknowledging that his dog was attacked by a wolf early Sunday morning.
John Stevie’s Siberian husky-wolf hybrid mix, Shelby, suffered wounds to the right side of her face in the battle on his porch in the countryside south of Twisp.
“It had her head in its mouth,” Stevie recalls seeing.
Another one of his dogs, an estimated 100-pound male named Lopi and also a hybrid, chased the wolf off, according to Stevie and state fish and wildlife officers.
You must have missed this part of the story you just posted. And looking at the pictures the wounded dog definitely looks more husky/wolf than blue heeler. You can see the wool which blue heelers don't get.
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 12:00:26 PM
John said his dog isn't doing too well she has infection in her face real bad now. He said he talk to one of his neighbors who lives about a quarter of a mile away, they said about two weeks ago they saw the biggest coyote they had ever seen, they said it walk right by their house and about fifty yards out. His neighbor whistled> the wolf stop and stood there for a few minutes and then it started pacing back and forth. John described the wolf that attacked his dog, and the guy then realized they had seen a wolf, not a coyote.
Donny Martorello called John again and told him they wouldn't be paying for his vet bills after all, he said they had funding for livestock and guard dogs but not domestic pets etc. He also said he thought SB 5187 was sure to pass now.
SB 5187 --Wash. Senate OKs Killing Wolves Without Permit
Posted: Mar 08, 2013
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - The Washington state Senate has passed a measure to allow livestock and pet owners to shoot gray wolves without a permit when the wolves are attacking or threatening their animals.
The bill, which passed the upper chamber Friday, is the latest salvo in an ongoing debate over how to cope with the reintroduction of the predatory canines in Washington state.
Supporters say the measure is necessary to allow people to protect their property.
Bill opponents say it would hurt the state's wolf recovery efforts and contradicts years of effort put into hashing out a state wolf plan.
The measure passed by a vote of 25-23, with Senate Majority Leader Rodney Tom not voting. It heads next to the Democratic-controlled House, where it faces an uphill battle for passage. http://www.khq.com/story/21559858/wash- (http://www.khq.com/story/21559858/wash-) … out-permit
More wolf attacks in the Methow Valley and Okanogan county which WDFW dismissed or failed to report, are now being reported to officials outside of WDFW.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on March 15, 2013, 12:36:41 PM
Post by: Alchase on March 15, 2013, 01:13:53 PM
Quote
I know many of you have trouble believing that WDFW released wolves in the Methow Valley or anywhere else in WA. Right now if I took WDFW to court over their wolf releases in 2009, they would either have to admit they had full knowledge of the release or Scott Fitkin would "probably" have to go to jail.
This is exactly what I was talking about!
While I do not live in the Methow and have to deal with this daily like some of you do. I and my hunting partners have been hunting the Methow for close to 30 years. Yes we have seen wolves, seen signs of wolves, and heard wolves almost every hunting season for way to many years. Many of those years were well before the WDFW would admit they were even there.
None of the hunters I know or have talked to about the wolf situation would be surprised at all if tomorrows head line stated
"Proof WDFW Lied About Wolf Reintroductions in the Methow"
Here is the problem, until the proof is out there for everyone to see and say
"See I told You So"
We all come a crossed as wackjobs to the rest of the state.
So again I will ask if this is factual:
Quote
I know many of you have trouble believing that WDFW released wolves in the Methow Valley or anywhere else in WA. Right now if I took WDFW to court over their wolf releases in 2009, they would either have to admit they had full knowledge of the release or Scott Fitkin would "probably" have to go to jail.[/b]
Post it up and let it become common knowledge!
I would almost guarantee there would be a ton of fallout through out the WDFW if this is true.
Wolfbait,
holding onto to such information is not benefiting the deer herds through out the Methow.
Let the chips fall where they may!
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 15, 2013, 01:26:37 PM
Post by: snowpack on March 15, 2013, 01:38:59 PM
There used to be more folks with some kind of knowledge about earlier wolf actions by WDFW in the region, but they went silent. I had read (on this site a while back) that a lot of them felt intimidated and fear of WDFW reprisal--so now kind of keep a low profile.
Post it up and let it become common knowledge!
I would almost guarantee there would be a ton of fallout through out the WDFW if this is true.
Wolfbait,
holding onto to such information is not benefiting the deer herds through out the Methow.
Let the chips fall where they may!
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 01:43:35 PM
If you have proof that wolves were released then the Cattleman's Assn. would love to talk with you, among others.
The information is being shared with the right people, we will have to wait and see what happens.
Post by: Special T on March 15, 2013, 01:46:16 PM
On a completely seperate note... Anyone remeber the aprox date of the wolves sighted on the skagit river with the gals pics? I've tried doing a couple of searches and can't find it. thanks
Post by: Alchase on March 15, 2013, 01:51:03 PM
PROOF is only as good as your ability to enforce/expose it. LOTS of $$$ will be needed to make sure it just doesn't get swept under the carpet. You are likley going to need a lawsuit, and a bunch of air time. :twocents:
Or a reporter willing to ask the right questions and report it
Post by: Special T on March 15, 2013, 02:05:33 PM
Post by: flatbkman on March 15, 2013, 02:15:17 PM
If this is true would the WDFW have to follow the same rules and regulations for relocation as they would for reintroduction into the state?
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 02:18:50 PM
My opinion regarding the dishonesty of WDFW and the wolves is not in the release of them. I don't think they ever released them. I do think/know that officials know about a lot more wolves than they acknowledge. There's a lot more packs around than they're "confirming". Slow-boating our way to delisting.
Post by: D-Rock425 on March 15, 2013, 02:49:41 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 15, 2013, 03:01:34 PM
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
NEWS RELEASE
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
February 15, 2013
Contact: Donny Martorello, 360-902-2521
Nate Pamplin, (360) 902-2693
State’s wolf population nearly doubled
last year, according to annual survey
OLYMPIA – The number of confirmed gray wolves and wolf packs in the state nearly doubled during the past year, according to an annual survey released today by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW).
Based on field reports and aerial monitoring, the 2012 survey confirms the presence of at least 51 wolves in nine wolf packs with a total of five successful breeding pairs. The previous year’s survey documented 27 wolves, five wolf packs and three breeding pairs.
A wolf pack is defined as two or more wolves traveling together. A successful breeding pair is defined as an adult male and female with at least two pups that survive until the end of the calendar year.
“The survey shows that our state’s wolf population is growing quickly,” said Nate Pamplin, WDFW wildlife program director. “That growth appears to be the result of both natural reproduction and the continuing in-migration of wolves from Canada and neighboring states.”
Pamplin said the actual number of wolves in Washington state is likely much higher than the number confirmed by the survey, noting that field biologists currently suspect the existence of two additional packs. In addition, lone wolves often go uncounted and those that range into Washington but den in other states are not included in WDFW’s survey, he said.
Considering those factors, and applying an estimate of the average pack size in other western states, there could easily be as many as 100 wolves in Washington, Pamplin said.
“The survey is the baseline we use to monitor wolves’ progress toward recovery,” he said. “While we’ve stepped up our monitoring efforts significantly over the past year, we recognize that it does not account for every wolf within our state’s borders.”
One of the nine packs represented in the survey is the Wedge pack, which now has two confirmed members in northeastern Washington. Last summer, WDFW eliminated seven members of the pack to end a series of attacks on an area rancher’s cattle that left six calves dead and 10 other animals injured.
Pamplin said wildlife biologists do not know whether the two wolves living near the Canadian border in Stevens County are members of the original Wedge pack or whether they are new arrivals from inside or koutside the state.
“Either way, we were confident that wolves would repopulate that area,” he said. “We really hope to prevent the kind of situation we faced with the Wedge pack last summer by working with ranchers to use non-lethal methods to protect their livestock.”
The gray wolf is currently listed by the state as an endangered species throughout Washington and is federally listed as endangered in the western two-thirds of the state. Once common, wolves were essentially eliminated in most western states during the past century because they preyed on livestock.
Under the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, wolves can be removed from the state’s endangered species list once 15 successful breeding pairs are documented for three consecutive years among three designated wolf-recovery regions. Four pairs are required in Eastern Washington, four pairs in the North Cascades, four pairs in South Cascades/Northwest Coast and three pairs in any recovery region.
More information on the state’s wolf packs and the 2012 survey is available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/packs/. (http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/gray_wolf/packs/.)
Reports of possible wolf sightings can be made to WDFW’s wildlife reporting line by calling (877) 933-9847.
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 03:29:36 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 15, 2013, 04:19:37 PM
They really don't have a clue as to how many cougars we have. And they admit that. I wouldn't expect it to be any different with wolves. It takes a heck of a lot of time and money to accurately count populations of any wild animal.
Now if wolves were their only priority I could see them doing a better job. But I don't really want them to ignore everything else, do you?
What about the elk with hoof rot issue? People are demanding that they make that a priority. We can't expect them to do everything. Unless they somehow can be provided with another source of funding.
Post by: Curly on March 15, 2013, 04:32:38 PM
Post by: Sawbuck on March 15, 2013, 05:22:05 PM
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 05:32:24 PM
Post by: Sawbuck on March 15, 2013, 07:07:28 PM
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 07:14:51 PM
So if that is the reason then why has it taken the wolves this long to move back in here?In 4 or so years we've gone from the Lookout pack to 9 packs? I think is the current number. Bobcat posted it earlier. 7 or 9. Anyway, I think that's pretty quick. I'm sure there's some moving around for food and some new packs forming around the state for territorial reasons too. A little bit of everything. Heck I think there's a pack in the northeast that travels back and forth between Idaho and Washington. Who gets to claim that pack?
I'm betting the Touche pack will be next confirmed. I think thats what theyre calling the pack running around the Dayton unit.
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 07:18:43 PM
So if that is the reason then why has it taken the wolves this long to move back in here? And personally I don't believe much of what Fitkin has to say about how and why wolves move. Just because it was on tv doesn't make it true.It's not just Fitkin that says it. It's science. It's what dogs do. The pack mentality. There's an alpha and there's subordinates. Male and female wolves that don't "fit" in the pack the way they want go make their own pack in their own territory. Other lone nomadic wolves join the new pack. Hierarchy is set, a new alpha male and female rule the roost and make baby wolves. It's nature. Fitkin didn't invent it.
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 07:24:23 PM
Wolves belong to family groups called packs, they usually consist of eight to fifteen-members. The rare exception is what is popularly know as a "lone wolf", this wolf would most likely be the lowest member of a pack (the omega) that was driven out of the pack, if it is lucky, the "lone wolf" may find a mate and start a new pack.
Wolf packs can have very large range (6 to 600 miles)
The alpha pair has the greatest amount of social freedom among all the pack members, but they are not "leaders" in the human sense of the term. The alphas do not give the other wolves orders; rather, they simply have the most freedom in choosing where to go, what to do, and when to do it. The rest of the pack usually follows. There are various subordinates, who dominate the omega. The omega is the lowest. It is the baby-sitter and usually more puppy than wolf.
(left) photograph ©Richard E. Flauto Wildlife Foundation
In larger packs, there may be also be a beta wolf or wolves - a "second-in-command" to the alphas. In addition, one wolf typically assumes the role of omega, the lowest-ranking member of a pack. These individuals absorb the greatest amount of aggression from the rest of the pack, and consequently enjoy comparatively few individual privileges.
While most alpha pairs are monogamous with each other, there are exceptions. An alpha animal may preferentially mate with a lower-ranking animal, especially if the other alpha is closely related (a brother or sister, for example). The death of one alpha does not affect the status of the other alpha, who will quickly take another mate. Usually, only the alpha pair is able to successfully rear a litter of pups (other wolves in a pack may breed, and may even produce pups, but usually they lack the freedom or the resources to raise the pups to maturity). All the wolves in the pack assist in raising wolf pups. Some mature individuals, usually females, may choose to stay in the original pack so as to reinforce it and help rear more pups. Most, males particularly, will disperse, however.
Rank order is established and maintained through a series of ritualized fights and posturing best described as ritual bluffing. Wolves prefer psychological warfare to physical confrontations, meaning that high-ranking status is based more on personality or attitude than on size or physical strength. Rank, who holds it, and how it is enforced varies widely between packs and between individual animals. In large packs full of easygoing wolves, or in a group of juvenile wolves, rank order may shift almost constantly, or even be circular (e.g., animal A dominates animal B, who dominates animal C, who dominates animal A).
(above/below photograph ©Richard E. Flauto Wildlife Foundation)
Loss of rank can happen gradually or suddenly. An older wolf may simply choose to give way when an ambitious challenger presents itself, yielding its position without bloodshed. On the other hand, the challenged individual may choose to fight back, with varying degrees of intensity. While the majority of wolf aggression is non-damaging and ritualized, a high-stakes fight can easily result in injury for either or both parties. The loser of such a confrontation is frequently chased away from the pack or, rarely, may be killed as other aggressive wolves contribute to the insurgency. This kind of dominance encounter is more common in the winter months, when mating occurs.
Wolves will defend there territory, they work as a pack to harass larger animals like bears, although a pack of 12 were once known to kill a grizzly bear, most times if the animal runs away the wolves will not attack.
Animals the wolf may come in contact with are:
Coyotes - They will avoid wolves most times. but when encounters occur they are aggressive.
Grizzly bears - Are known to eat wolf pups, wolves will chase away bears from the den area.
Cougars - Although rare in nature, the cougar being a lone hunter is at a disadvantage in a fight with a wolf pack.
Foxes - Foxes have been observed stealing from wolf kills, wolves have been know to steal fox dens, wolves have been known to kill foxes, though it is rare, more often than not they ignore these tiny predators, the exceptions is in the arctic region where wolves will usually kill a fox on sight.
Ravens - One of the most fascinating relationships between animals is the one that seems to exist between wolves and raven. The raven, scavenger of food of all types, will often follow wolf packs in hopes of morsels of food. and wolves have learned to watch for circling ravens as a sign of possible food below.
Dogs - Although wolves are physiologically capable of breeding with dogs, such crossed usually happen in captive situations, trappers tales of wild wolves mating with dogs is usually a campfire myth. Most encounters between wild wolves and dogs are aggressive in nature, it is only natural a dog would be a trespasser in a wolf's territory, small yapping dogs may be attacked as nuisances.
COMMUNICATION
Body Postures
Wolves communicate not only by sound (such as yipping, growling, and howling), but also by body language. This ranges from subtle signals-such as a slight shift in weight-to the obvious, like rolling on the back as a sign of submission.
Here are some other examples of Body postures:
Dominance - A dominant wolf stands stiff legged and tall. The ears are erect and forward, and the hackles bristle slightly. Often the tail is held vertical and curled toward the back. This display shows the wolf's rank to all others in the pack. A dominant lupine may stare penetratingly at a submissive one, pin it to the ground, "ride up" on its shoulders, or even stand on its hind legs.
Submission (active) - In active submission, the entire body is lowered, and the lips and ears are drawn back. Sometimes active submission is accompanied by a rapid thrusting out of the tongue and lowering of the hindquarters. The tail is placed down, or halfway or fully between the legs, and the muzzle often points up to the more dominant animal. The back may be partially arched as the submissive wolf humbles itself to its superior. (A more arched back and more tucked tail indicate a greater level of submission.)
Submission (passive) - Passive submission is more intense than active submission. The wolf rolls on its back and exposes its vulnerable throat and underside. The paws are drawn into the body. This is often accompanied by whimpering.
Anger - An angry lupine's ears are erect, and its fur bristles. The lips may curl up or pull back, and the incisors are displayed. The wolf may also snarl.
Fear - A frightened wolf tries to make its body look small and therefore less conspicuous. The ears flatten down against the head, and the tail may be tucked between the legs, as with a submissive wolf. There may also be whimpering or barks of fear, and the wolf may arch its back. Defensive - A defensive wolf flattens its ears against its head.
Aggression - An aggressive wolf snarls and its fur bristles. The wolf may crouch, ready to attack if necessary.
Suspicion - Pulling back of the ears shows a lupine is suspicious. In addition, the wolf narrows its eyes. The tail of a wolf that senses danger points straight out, parallel to the ground.
Relaxedness - A relaxed wolf's tail points straight down, and the wolf may rest sphinxlike or on its side. The wolf's tail may also wag. The further down the tail droops, the more relaxed the wolf is. Tension - An aroused wolf's tail points straight out, and the wolf may crouch as if ready to spring.
Happiness - As dogs do, a lupine may wag its tail if it is in a joyful mood. The tongue may loll out of the mouth.
Hunting - A wolf that is hunting is tensed, and therefore the tail is horizontal and straight.
Playfulness - A playful lupine holds its tail high and wags it. The wolf may frolic and dance around, or bow by placing the front of its body down to the ground, while holding the rear high, sometimes wagged. This is reminiscent of the playful behavior executed in domestic dogs.
Photograph (above right) from The Searching Wolf
COMMUNICATION THROUGH SCENT
Wolves have a very good sense of smell Research shows wolves have been able to detect their pray at distances of up to 1.75 miles (3 kilometers), which they also use to communicate. Wolves mark their territory with urine and faeces. This is called scent marking. When "outside" wolves smell this, they know that an area is already occupied. Of course, their sense of smell also tells them when food or enemies are near.
(Above photograph ©Richard E. Flauto Wildlife Foundation)
COMMUNICATION THROUGH SOUND - THE WOLF HOWL
Wolves howl for several reasons. Howling helps pack members keep in touch, allowing them to effectively communicate in thickly forested areas or over great distances. Furthermore, howling helps to summon pack members to a specific location. Howling can also serve as a declaration of territory, as portrayed by a dominant wolf's tendency to respond to a human imitation of a "rival" individual in an area that the wolf considers its own. This behavior is also stimulated when a pack has something to protect, such as a fresh kill. As a rule of thumb, large packs will more readily draw attention to themselves than will smaller packs. Adjacent packs may respond to each others' howls, which can mean trouble for the smaller of the two. Thus, wolves tend to howl with great care.
Wolves will also howl for communal reasons. Some scientists speculate that such group sessions strengthen the wolves' social bonds and camaraderie -- similar to community singing among humans. During such choral sessions, wolves will howl at different tones and varying pitches, which tends to prevent a listener from accurately estimating the number of wolves involved. This concealment of numbers makes a listening rival pack wary of what action to take. For example, confrontation could mean bad news if the rival pack gravely underestimates the howling pack's numbers.
Observations of wolf packs suggest that howling occurs most often during the twilight hours, preceding the adults' departure to the hunt and following their return. Studies also show that wolves howl more frequently during the breeding season and subsequent rearing process. The pups themselves begin howling towards the end of July, and can be provoked into howling sessions relatively easily over the following two months. Such indiscriminate howling usually has a communicative intent, and has no adverse consequences so early in a wolf's life. Howling becomes less indiscriminate as wolves learn to distinguish howling pack members from rival wolves.
Post by: hirshey on March 15, 2013, 07:24:50 PM
Post by: Sawbuck on March 15, 2013, 07:29:37 PM
Post by: Sawbuck on March 15, 2013, 07:33:37 PM
The economy may be bad.. But I still argue that if I personally can come across so many wolves in my spare time, shouldn't a full time employee be able to do better? :dunno:Yeah, half of the problem is that they don't have a clue how many wolves or packs are actually in this state.
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 07:35:15 PM
I'm not saying that I don't believe the science behind them moving to breed, I'm saying that that's not all that happened in this state. The wolves have had help getting moved throughout this state. I saw wolves in the south central cascades thirteen years ago. "They" dropped them off two drainages away from our elk camp. For four years we herd them howl, saw there tracks, and eventually we saw them. No I couldn't get pics of them, and I'm sure you'll say BS, but really it makes no difference to me, I know what I saw and other guys saw them too. It took about four years and then nothing, no more sign of any kind. Maybe they moved to breed? :chuckle: I think they moved down to get an easier meal.
I have no reason to call BS on that.
Post by: bobcat on March 15, 2013, 07:37:53 PM
Quote
I saw wolves in the south central cascades thirteen years ago. "They" dropped them off two drainages away from our elk camp.
I saw three wolves 23 years ago in the north central cascades. But I never thought people put them there. Why do you think those wolves didn't get their on their own four feet?
Post by: Sawbuck on March 15, 2013, 07:41:45 PM
Sorry, I get a little defensive. When I tried to report the sighting to several different people they all told me I was mistaken, that there were no wolves, and that they must have been wild dogs or coyotes.I'm not saying that I don't believe the science behind them moving to breed, I'm saying that that's not all that happened in this state. The wolves have had help getting moved throughout this state. I saw wolves in the south central cascades thirteen years ago. "They" dropped them off two drainages away from our elk camp. For four years we herd them howl, saw there tracks, and eventually we saw them. No I couldn't get pics of them, and I'm sure you'll say BS, but really it makes no difference to me, I know what I saw and other guys saw them too. It took about four years and then nothing, no more sign of any kind. Maybe they moved to breed? :chuckle: I think they moved down to get an easier meal.
I have no reason to call BS on that.
Post by: Sawbuck on March 15, 2013, 07:53:52 PM
I would believe that they would move in and out of the far north part of the state and if I saw them up there I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that they got put there either. There were many facts and circumstances that led me to believe that they got put where I first saw them. The real crazy thing is that one had a collar and somebody out there knows where they came from and what happened to them. Should be public info, but its not, and I think that is because nobody wants to fess up to reintroducing wolves anywhere.QuoteI saw wolves in the south central cascades thirteen years ago. "They" dropped them off two drainages away from our elk camp.
I saw three wolves 23 years ago in the north central cascades. But I never thought people put them there. Why do you think those wolves didn't get their on their own four feet?
Post by: bobcat on March 15, 2013, 08:15:29 PM
Should be pretty simple. Delist wolves in the eastern 1/3 of the state; allow shoot on sight status for wolves there. Then for the rest of the State, allow people to protect themselves, livestock, and pets by shooting any wolf that gets too close. I don't see why they really need more funding...... :dunno:
:chuckle: Don't you think it's more complicated than that? This is an endangered species, and the wolves have hundreds of thousands of city people who love them, and want to see them all over this state in high numbers. The state can't simply delist them, just like that. There will be lawsuits. Political ramifications. Who knows what all will happen. The wolf lovers aren't going to just give a thumbs up and shout for joy when the state tries to open a hunting season on wolves. And even if the WDFW successfully gets a hunting season for wolves, do you think they're just going to give away tags for almost no cost like they do cougar tags? No, it'll probably be a draw, "Quality" wolf application will be $15 and the tag will be $300.
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 08:21:58 PM
Wolves also move because they breed. New packs form in new areas because they are very territorial. A new pack forms and has to move to a new area. 2 packs won't survive in the same place. I'd bet that's the top reason they're expanding their range in Washington. That Conservation NW documentary with Fitkin that was on the Discovery channel showed that alpha female from the methow move to the teanaway and form a new pack. The wolves in the blues came from Oregon.
Actually jack, that has also been proven to be false. In Idaho they have discovered that small wolf packs will come together and hunt as one huge pack, these major wolf packs have been known to be 43 wolves strong.
17 years of Alberta wolves in ID, MT and Wyoming, and the wolves have made liars out of the USFWS and everyone else who promoted them, including David Mech who admiited it not too long ago.
You say that these packs drive others out, well here in the Methow Valley we now have five wolf packs, in 2010 we were sure we had seven, that would be seven with pups. So I would have to say thats just one more lie, that the wolves have proven, to be a lie..
Remember the lie that only the mommy and daddy wolves breed? :chuckle: That also was proven to be a lie.
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 08:27:30 PM
Should be pretty simple. Delist wolves in the eastern 1/3 of the state; allow shoot on sight status for wolves there. Then for the rest of the State, allow people to protect themselves, livestock, and pets by shooting any wolf that gets too close. I don't see why they really need more funding...... :dunno:
:chuckle: Don't you think it's more complicated than that? This is an endangered species, and the wolves have hundreds of thousands of city people who love them, and want to see them all over this state in high numbers. The state can't simply delist them, just like that. There will be lawsuits. Political ramifications. Who knows what all will happen. The wolf lovers aren't going to just give a thumbs up and shout for joy when the state tries to open a hunting season on wolves. And even if the WDFW successfully gets a hunting season for wolves, do you think they're just going to give away tags for almost no cost like they do cougar tags? No, it'll probably be a draw, "Quality" wolf application will be $15 and the tag will be $300.
Defenders of Wildlife will step in with a lawsuit and the game will start all over again, look at the history of wolves.
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 08:44:29 PM
The economy may be bad.. But I still argue that if I personally can come across so many wolves in my spare time, shouldn't a full time employee be able to do better? :dunno:
We have many WDFW rigs in the Methow Valley, and wolves howling from on end to the other, but I guess we lack get-up-n-go on the part of WDFW. Or maybe they can only count to 2 in the Methow, might be the air. :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on March 15, 2013, 08:52:33 PM
I'm assuming they're spread out though, no? They're not all living in harmony together are they?
You say that these packs drive others out, well here in the Methow Valley we now have five wolf packs, in 2010 we were sure we had seven, that would be seven with pups. So I would have to say thats just one more lie, that the wolves have proven, to be a lie..
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 09:09:15 PM
I'm assuming they're spread out though, no? They're not all living in harmony together are they?
You say that these packs drive others out, well here in the Methow Valley we now have five wolf packs, in 2010 we were sure we had seven, that would be seven with pups. So I would have to say thats just one more lie, that the wolves have proven, to be a lie..
You know I really don't know their language well enough to ask them, but in 2011 when the BBC crew, Conservation NW and Fitkin were doing their film we showed them four pictures of wolves from the lookout pack and we told them about the six wolves over in Cow Cr. maybe ten miles as the crow flys. So my guess is they seem to get along pretty good. Now that we are about out of deer they might start bickering about who gets which dog or cow/calf.
Post by: wolfbait on March 15, 2013, 09:10:41 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs23.postimage.org%2Fz30hjnci3%2FWolf_Kill_1.jpg&hash=62da9120ea801a5c542e026b17d0b8876773a97c)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs11.postimage.org%2Fsnwlif7j7%2Fwolf_Kill_2.jpg&hash=efdd0661febe8088c0ac97b22d45d2e3dd8866e0)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs8.postimage.org%2Fyi5773nnp%2Fwolf_Kill_3.jpg&hash=601568c2e8aed44e174c208f401d46a62323b9c7)
Post by: hirshey on March 15, 2013, 10:29:49 PM
The economy may be bad.. But I still argue that if I personally can come across so many wolves in my spare time, shouldn't a full time employee be able to do better? :dunno:
We have many WDFW rigs in the Methow Valley, and wolves howling from on end to the other, but I guess we lack get-up-n-go on the part of WDFW. Or maybe they can only count to 2 in the Methow, might be the air. :chuckle:
Lots of those wdfw rigs are fisheries folks not trappers.. And some of them are certainly disappointed with how the wolf issues have been handled as well.
Post by: MR5x5 on March 16, 2013, 06:21:10 AM
Post by: boneaddict on March 16, 2013, 06:28:19 AM
The economy may be bad.. But I still argue that if I personally can come across so many wolves in my spare time, shouldn't a full time employee be able to do better? :dunno:
TELL ME ABOUT IT!
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 16, 2013, 07:24:01 AM
We need to start a Capital forest pack...... A big one.
Now that wouldn't be directed at this sites FOREMOST WDFW defender, would it?
Post by: teanawayslayer on March 16, 2013, 07:37:14 AM
Post by: jackelope on March 16, 2013, 08:09:27 AM
Is there any truth to killing a grey wolf if it is endangering your pets or property? Something about a bill that will be passed or has passed. If that would have been my dog there would be no question in my mind that the wolf would have been toast.
Its in the works.
HB5187 maybe?
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 16, 2013, 08:20:31 AM
(What is this?) Comment on this bill (What is this?)
Protecting livestock against predator attacks.
Revised for 1st Substitute: Protecting domestic animals against gray wolf attacks.
Go to documents...
Go to videos...
History of the Bill
as of Saturday, March 16, 2013 8:16 AM
Sponsors: Senators Smith, Becker, Roach, Schoesler, Honeyford
Companion Bill: HB 1191
2013 REGULAR SESSION
Jan 23 First reading, referred to Natural Resources & Parks. (View Original Bill)
Jan 29 Public hearing in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources & Parks at 1:30 PM. (Committee Materials)
Feb 14 Executive action taken in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources & Parks at 1:30 PM. (Committee Materials)
Feb 15 NRP - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass. (View 1st Substitute) (Majority Report)
Minority; do not pass. (Minority Report)
Feb 18 Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.
Feb 27 Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.
Mar 8 1st substitute bill substituted (NRP 13). (View 1st Substitute)
Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.
Third reading, passed; yeas, 25; nays, 23; absent, 0; excused, 1. (View Roll Calls)
IN THE HOUSE
Mar 11 First reading, referred to Agriculture & Natural Resources (Not Officially read and referred until adoption of Introduction report).
Mar 20 Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Agriculture & Natural Resources at 8:00 AM. (Subject to change) (Committee Materials)
Post by: MR5x5 on March 16, 2013, 08:29:42 AM
[/quote]
No. Truly not. We, the state, are all in this together. We, within the state, are not impacted anywhere near on an equal basis. Clearly the vast majority in favor are not being impacted at all. If establishment of populations is the end goal, I am at a loss as to why wouldn't do everything possible to achieve this noble goal...and expose all of us within the state to impacts of our decisions. That one side our state is pitted against the other is saddening.
The idea that we treat the wolves as endanger is insane!!! They are not. When was the last time you saw a Giraffe in our woods? I guess they must be endangered too...
Tree Huggers - Their basic problem is that they don't understand there is very little natural about nature anymore. Hasn't been for at least the 100+ years or more.
Full disclosure - I hale from East Issaquah - I'm not an east side wacko :chuckle:
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 16, 2013, 08:34:59 AM
Now that wouldn't be directed at this sites FOREMOST WDFW defender, would it?
No. Truly not. We, the state, are all in this together. We, within the state, are not impacted anywhere near on an equal basis. Clearly the vast majority in favor are not being impacted at all. If establishment of populations is the end goal, I am at a loss as to why wouldn't do everything possible to achieve this noble goal...and expose all of us within the state to impacts of our decisions. That one side our state is pitted against the other is saddening.
The idea that we treat the wolves as endanger is insane!!! They are not. When was the last time you saw a Giraffe in our woods? I guess they must be endangered too...
Tree Huggers - Their basic problem is that they don't understand there is very little natural about nature anymore. Hasn't been for at least the 100+ years or more.
Full disclosure - I hale from East Issaquah - I'm not an east side wacko :chuckle:
[/quote]
just curious
Looks like the Senate did the work on this one. WE NEED to get on our representatives to pass the senate version, since they let theirs die....
Bill Information > HB 1191 - 2013-14
Print Version | [No disponible en español]
Search by Bill Number
Search the full text of a bill
HB 1191 - 2013-14
(What is this?) Comment on this bill (What is this?)
Protecting livestock against predator attacks.
Go to documents...
Go to videos...
History of the Bill
as of Saturday, March 16, 2013 8:23 AM
Sponsors: Representatives Short, Blake, Takko, Shea, Kretz, Crouse, Schmick, Chandler, Orcutt, Fagan
Companion Bill: SB 5187
2013 REGULAR SESSION
Jan 18 First reading, referred to Agriculture & Natural Resources. (View Original Bill)
Feb 5 Public hearing in the House Committee on Agriculture & Natural Resources at 10:00 AM. (Committee Materials)
Go to history...
Available Documents
Bill Documents Bill Digests Bill Reports
Original Bill
Bill Digest
Post by: Curly on March 16, 2013, 08:54:06 AM
Should be pretty simple. Delist wolves in the eastern 1/3 of the state; allow shoot on sight status for wolves there. Then for the rest of the State, allow people to protect themselves, livestock, and pets by shooting any wolf that gets too close. I don't see why they really need more funding...... :dunno:
:chuckle: Don't you think it's more complicated than that? This is an endangered species, and the wolves have hundreds of thousands of city people who love them, and want to see them all over this state in high numbers. The state can't simply delist them, just like that. There will be lawsuits. Political ramifications. Who knows what all will happen. The wolf lovers aren't going to just give a thumbs up and shout for joy when the state tries to open a hunting season on wolves. And even if the WDFW successfully gets a hunting season for wolves, do you think they're just going to give away tags for almost no cost like they do cougar tags? No, it'll probably be a draw, "Quality" wolf application will be $15 and the tag will be $300.
It really doesn't need to be more complicated than that. The Feds already gave the State the right to delist the eastern 1/3; the state should have done it ASAP. All we need is someone with some balls as director of WDFW and a commission that isn't scared of all the wolf huggers.
WA State was in a perfect position to come out with a good wolf plan since we had the benefit of watching what happened in ID, MT, and WY. We already know that hunting isn't very effective for controlling the population, so why not allow hunting? It would make us sportsmen feel better to kill some wolves and feel like we're making a difference (even though it may be only a small difference).
WDFW should have delisted wolves where the feds allowed it to happen, and they should have been arguing with the Feds about delisting the rest of the state. Not the other way around where the State has a wolf plan that is just so crazy in favor of wolves. :bash:
As far as wolf huggers and lawsuits, we need judges to tell them to pound sand. That is a terrible way to manage wildlife (by public opinion and lawsuits). We need a governor like Butch Otter to just give the middle finger to the feds and the wolf huggers.
(On another note, aren't Initiatives only valid for a couple years? Why can't the state allow trapping, hound hunting, and bear baiting again?) :dunno: Wildlife management by initiative and by the dumb public is stupid.
Post by: Curly on March 16, 2013, 09:07:59 AM
BTW - I still think the State should pay the vet bills. Maybe they don't have to legally (and maybe it would set precedence) but I think it's the right thing to do for Mr. Stevie).
:sry: Rant over. :)
Post by: wolfbait on March 16, 2013, 09:19:19 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 16, 2013, 09:43:11 AM
Post by: mulehunter on March 16, 2013, 06:03:44 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 16, 2013, 06:15:38 PM
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/992/794/261/ (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/992/794/261/)
Should I sign as I.P. Freely?
Post by: Curly on March 16, 2013, 07:45:31 PM
I've got a moron in the family....... Shared this one.....
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/992/794/261/ (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/992/794/261/)
Should I sign as I.P. Freely?
I read some of the comments from those people signing that petition.........what a bunch of :mor:
Post by: Wenatcheejay on March 16, 2013, 09:06:00 PM
Folks, at the recent Colville meeting the WDFW put it all in perspective, they explained that there is a lot of passion on both sides of the wolf issue and that there is a lot of money.
HELLO.... Hunters, ranchers, and rural residents are not pouring in lots of money for wolves, no, the WDFW has sold out to the wolf lovers who are pouring in the money for wolves. They fell victim to the dollars and the disney wolf story the same way IDFG and MFWP did.
My guess is that in the end, this wolf money will dry up and hunters dollars will dissipate when the herds have been reduced which is exactly how it has played out in ID & MT, the WDFW and the people of WA will be left with a landscape full of wolves and no more big easy dollars for WDFW.
Folks, we are all watching 100 years of responsible wildlife management being thrown right out the window.
You are 100% correct bearpaw. This mismanagement is willful and intentional. WWDFW Western Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife does not represent your part of Washington, they dictate to it. Much in the same way that people from the Western Side tell you what is happing in your backyard. They will distroy your way of life, distroy your income, and ability to provide for your family as much as possible. They pass regulation that does not serve your interests but lines their pockets. 100 years of management distroyed is the goal, always was.
Post by: JakeLand on March 17, 2013, 12:57:41 PM
Post by: wolfbait on March 17, 2013, 09:59:38 PM
"I know of two wolf attacks since Febuary on people's pets within a few miles of Twisp, the first one was reported to WDFW. Their response was: That doesn't sound like a wolf to us. The second one was reported to the Okanogan county sheriff. Anyone who has a wolf problem, Report it to the Okanogan County Sheriff! # 1 You will get an answer to your problem and # 2 It will be recorded".
I wonder if WDFW remembers the wolf that ran a house cat up the porch, the owner was within a few feet of the wolf. He called WDFW, they came out and took pictures of the wolf tracks the next morning, and once again their reply was "that doesn't sound like a wolf to us".
Not long after that attack, a wolf jumped a mans dog in his front yard, the owner saw the attack. This attack was reported to the Okanogan County sheriff. Quite sure WDFW was also informed.
How many wolf attacks have WDFW failed to imform the people of WA of?
In the last seven years there have been several wolf/pet attacks reported to WDFW just in the Methow Valley, why don't these attacks show up on WDFW's Dangerous Wildlife Incidents?
I guess if WDFW doesn't report wolf attacks they don't have to worry about explaining why it wasn't an attack.
Dangerous Wildlife Incidents in Washington
A map of recent wolf observations submitted via WDFW's online wolf reporting form is available here.
July 31, 2010 – Tonasket, Okanogan County (Wolf)
May 12, 2010 – Tonasket, Okanogan County (Wolf)
June 20, 2011 – Tonasket, Okanogan County (Wolf
August 12, 2012 – Carlton, Okanogan County (Wolf)
May 19, 2012 – Carlton, Okanogan County (Wolf)
February 16, 2012 – Tonasket, Okanogan County (Wolf)
January 29, 2012 – Tonasket, Okanogan County (Wolf)
March 10, 2013 – Twisp, Okanogan County (Wolf)
WDFW Danerous Animal Reports http://wdfw.wa.gov/living/dangerous/reports/index.php?species=3&county=18&year=2010 (http://wdfw.wa.gov/living/dangerous/reports/index.php?species=3&county=18&year=2010)
I wonder if this wolf attack was also reported to WDFW?
First off, I am not a "Wolf Hate Monger" by any means.
Two weeks ago while walking with my wife on the Twisp Carlton Hwy 3 /1/2 miles north of Carlton, a Black Wolf crossed the Highway in the pursuit of a Whitetail Doe, not more than 70 Yards in front of us. I was unable to get my I-Phone Camera out in time to get a photo, but I walked up the hillside in the snow and got a clear and excellent picture of its track. I reported this to my neighbor who was out pruning his apply trees closeby, and he stated to us that a Black Wolf attached his Pit Bull Female in Nov. in his yard, and it took 12 stiches in the shoulder area to close the wound by a local Vet. His son fired a shotgun into the air and the Wolf ran away. We live near the Lookout Mtn Pack, and this is the 2nd Wolf we have seen out hiking in two years.
The people of WA need to hold WDFW accountable!
Post by: Special T on March 17, 2013, 10:14:59 PM
Post by: Sawbuck on March 17, 2013, 10:25:21 PM
Sick'em Wolfbait... You have obviously done your home work. Posting articles on wolf attacks over the years,and keeping tabs on the happenings despite the nay sayers. Keep up the good work, and be sure to gloat here when info is released in COURT so some of us can applaud your efforts. :twocents::tup: :yeah:
Post by: snowpack on March 17, 2013, 10:28:08 PM
Post by: AspenBud on March 18, 2013, 07:19:09 AM
Can you request all their wolf documents using FOIA? Though, from the reputation of WDFW bios they've probably been shredded and if not wouldn't cough them up under court order. Slimy weasels.
As long as you can prove it's not being requested for malicious intent (like that newspaper out east getting concealed carry holders addresses and publishing them) I would think FOIA can be used here. It's all public information as long as you're willing to file the paperwork to get it. That doesn't mean they might not try to lawyer up before you can get it, but from e-mail to wolves, it's public information that can be requested.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 18, 2013, 07:25:30 AM
Sick'em Wolfbait... You have obviously done your home work. Posting articles on wolf attacks over the years,and keeping tabs on the happenings despite the nay sayers. Keep up the good work, and be sure to gloat here when info is released in COURT so some of us can applaud your efforts. :twocents::tup: :yeah:
X 3
Post by: wolfbait on March 18, 2013, 08:50:13 AM
By Andy Walgamott, on March 15th, 2013
State law is barring WDFW from paying the vet bill for a dog that was attacked by a wolf on Sunday morning in the Methow Valley.
However, in the future, pet owners could be reimbursed if their animals are injured when they tangle with wolves under a bill that passed the state Senate earlier this week.
The bills for Shelby, the Siberian husky-wolf hybrid, have rung up at least $289 for John Stevie and his family, and will probably be more. The dog suffered injuries to her face, neck and ears.
After WDFW determined it was indeed a wolf attack, based on interviews with Stevie and his partner and evidence at the scene, state wolf manager Donny Martorello looked into compensation for them.
“We were trying to find a way,” says Madonna Luers, a spokeswoman for the agency, this morning. “We were not able to.”
She points to RCW 77.36.110 which doesn’t allow it because animals like Shelby are not considered commercial livestock.
The state wolf management plan does include compensation for herding or guarding dogs injured by wolves, but those have to be associated with livestock operations, like the Martinez sheep company dog that was worked over by the Teanaway Pack in 2011. WDFW paid its vet bill, estimated in the $300 to $500 range.
The plan doesn’t include hybrid dogs or domestic pets, Luers said, even ones that are guarding homes in the countryside.
Wisconsin’s wolf plan does allow that, WDFW’s management document says.
By an unusual coincidence, the attack came just two days after the state Senate passed a bill that “Requires that rules established by the fish and wildlife commission allow an owner, the owner’s immediate family member, the agent of an owner, or the owner’s documented employee to kill a gray wolf that is attacking or poses an immediate threat of physical harm to livestock or other domestic animals regardless of its state classification and without the need for a permit or other form of permission.,” according to a bill digest for SB 5187. It is now in the House where it will have a hearing on March 20 before the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.
Stevie lives below McClure Mountain south of Twisp, in an area frequented by many animals. He said he keeps the hybrids for protection.
The area is part of the Lookout Pack territory, and state officials point out there are likely many more wolves than they know about dispersing across the countryside. Martorello said yesterday afternoon that another GPS-collared Smackout male had wandered 100 miles into Canada. http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/15/wdfw-cant-pay-for-injuries-to-dog-attacked-by-wolf/ (http://nwsportsmanmag.com/2013/03/15/wdfw-cant-pay-for-injuries-to-dog-attacked-by-wolf/)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"BY AN UNUSUAL COINCIDENCE???, the attack came just two days after the state Senate passed a bill that “Requires that rules established by the fish and wildlife commission allow an owner, the owner’s immediate family member, the agent of an owner, or the owner’s documented employee to kill a gray wolf that is attacking or poses an immediate threat of physical harm to livestock or other domestic animals regardless of its state classification and without the need for a permit or other form of permission.,” according to a bill digest for SB 5187. It is now in the House where it will have a hearing on March 20 before the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not unusual at all Andy, in the last two years there have been four wolf attacks on dogs within a few miles of the same area that Shelby was attack, WDFW just refuse to report these attacks. Why do you suppose that is? Out of sight out of mind in WDFW's eyes and to hell with the people and their pets who have to deal with an out of control wolf pupulation in the Methow Valley.
Did anyone see the story of the rancher who believes wolves were into his cattle last fall, his cows chased his herding dogs, just like has happened in other states where wolves are killing cattle. This rancher said he beleives he lost two calves to wolves last year. I talk to this same rancher in 2011, he lost a calf close to home that year and beleived it was wolves. He told me he had seen the cow and calf the night before and the next morning all that was left was a calf head and a wild-eyed cow. http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,120283.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,120283.0.html)
What will it take to bring honesty back into WDFW? Is protecting wolves that have made liars out of the USFWS, and those who promote them more inportant then other wildlife, livestock, pets and people?
Please call or e-mail every Washington State Representative and urge them to pass SB 5187.
Copy and paste these addresses to your Cc; or Bcc;
jan.angel@leg.wa.gov, gary.alexander@leg.wa.gov, appleton.sherry@leg.wa.gov, bergquist.steve@leg.wa.gov, blake.brian@leg.wa.gov, vincent.buys@leg.wa.gov, reuven.carlyle@leg.wa.gov, bruce.chandler@leg.wa.gov, 'frank.chopp@leg.wa.gov, judy.clibborn@leg.wa.gov, eileen.cody@leg.wa.gov, cary.condotta@leg.wa.gov, larry.crouse@leg.wa.gov, cathy.dahlquist@leg.wa.gov, richard.debolt@leg.wa.gov, hans.dunshee@leg.wa.gov, susan.fagan@leg.wa.gov, farrell.jessyn@leg.wa.gov, fey.jake@leg.wa.gov, fitzgibbon.joe@leg.wa.gov, freeman.roger@leg.wa.gov, roger.goodman@leg.wa.gov, tami.green@leg.wa.gov, habib.cyrus@leg.wa.gov, haigh.kathy@leg.wa.gov, larry.haler@leg.wa.gov, drew.hansen@leg.wa.gov, mark.hargrove@leg.wa.gov, paul.harris@leg.wa.gov, brad.hawkins@leg.wa.gov, dave.hayes@leg.wa.gov, jeff.holy@leg.wa.gov, mike.hope@leg.wa.go, zack.hudgins@leg.wa.gov, sam.hunt@leg.wa.gov, ross.hunter@leg.wa.gov, christopher.hurst@leg.wa.gov, laurie.jinkins@leg.wa.gov, norm.johnson@leg.wa.gov, ruth.kagi@leg.wa.gov, steve.kirby@leg.wa.gov, brad.klippert@leg.wa.gov, linda.kochmar@leg.wa.gov, joel.kretz@leg.wa.gov, dan.kristiansen@leg.wa.gov, marko.liias@leg.wa.gov, kristine.lytton@leg.wa.gov, drew.macewen@leg.wa.gov, chad.magendanz@leg.wa.gov, matt.manweller@leg.wa.gov, maxwell.marcie@leg.wa.gov, john.mccoy@leg.wa.gov, jim.moeller@leg.wa.gov, morrell.dawn@leg.wa.gov, jeff.morris@leg.wa.gov, luis.moscoso@leg.wa.gov, terry.nealey@leg.wa.gov, steve.oban@leg.wa.gov, ed.orcutt@leg.wa.gov, timm.ormsby@leg.wa.gov, tina.orwall@leg.wa.gov, jason.overstreet@leg.wa.gov, kevin.parker@leg.wa.gov, jamie.pedersen@leg.wa.gov, eric.pettigrew@leg.wa.gov, liz.pike@leg.wa.gov, gerry.pollet@leg.wa.gov, chris.reykdal@leg.wa.gov, riccelli.marcus@leg.wa.gov, maryhelen.roberts@leg.wa.gov, jay.rodne@leg.wa.gov, charles.ross@leg.wa.gov, cindy.ryu@leg.wa.gov, santos.sharontomiko@leg.wa.gov, sawyer.david@leg.wa.gov, joe.schmick@leg.wa.gov, elizabeth.scott@leg.wa.gov, larry.seaquist@leg.wa.gov, mike.sells@leg.wa.gov, matt.shea@leg.wa.gov, shelly.short@leg.wa.gov, norma.smith@leg.wa.gov, larry.springer@leg.wa.gov, derek.stanford@leg.wa.gov, stonier.monica@leg.wa.gov, pat.sullivan@leg.wa.gov, dean.takko@leg.wa.gov, tarleton.gael@leg.wa.gov, david.taylor@leg.wa.gov, steve.tharinger@leg.wa.gov, ave.upthegrove@leg.wa.gov, kevin.vandewege@leg.wa.gov, brandon.vick@leg.wa.gov, maureen.walsh@leg.wa.gov, judy.warnick@leg.wa.gov, jt.wilcox@leg.wa.gov, sharon.wylie@leg.wa.gov, hans.zeiger@leg.wa.gov
mike.hope@leg.wa.gov, frank.chopp@leg.wa.gov
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 18, 2013, 10:06:52 AM
Post by: mulehunter on March 18, 2013, 12:19:00 PM
Dear Scott,
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office to voice your support of Senate Bill 5187, protecting domestic animals against gray wolf attacks. This bill is currently scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Agriculture & Natural Resources at 8am on March 20. I have passed along your message to Speaker Chopp.
Thank you,
Jennifer Johnson
House Democratic Caucus
Legislative Assistant, House Democratic Leadership
Post by: wolfbait on March 18, 2013, 02:43:42 PM
Wolfbait....it would be good if you could remove the 's and ;s from that list. took me over an hour to fix it so my e mail would accept and send it on the other subject Friday, but I guess now I can go to the "sent messages" and change the content.....:sry:
Would you fix that for me Elkaholic daWg, Thanks :tup:
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on March 18, 2013, 04:01:55 PM
Big wolf packs also break into smaller groups and hunt regularly. They are not always together. You guys seeing wolves in different areas within the same home range doesn't necessarily mean that there are multiple packs.Wolves also move because they breed. New packs form in new areas because they are very territorial. A new pack forms and has to move to a new area. 2 packs won't survive in the same place. I'd bet that's the top reason they're expanding their range in Washington. That Conservation NW documentary with Fitkin that was on the Discovery channel showed that alpha female from the methow move to the teanaway and form a new pack. The wolves in the blues came from Oregon.
Actually jack, that has also been proven to be false. In Idaho they have discovered that small wolf packs will come together and hunt as one huge pack, these major wolf packs have been known to be 43 wolves strong.
17 years of Alberta wolves in ID, MT and Wyoming, and the wolves have made liars out of the USFWS and everyone else who promoted them, including David Mech who admiited it not too long ago.
You say that these packs drive others out, well here in the Methow Valley we now have five wolf packs, in 2010 we were sure we had seven, that would be seven with pups. So I would have to say thats just one more lie, that the wolves have proven, to be a lie..
Remember the lie that only the mommy and daddy wolves breed? :chuckle: That also was proven to be a lie.
Only "mommy and daddy" wolves do breed. What are you talking about?
BTW- welcome back. how did that super secret legal battle go? Last we talked, you are on the verge of proving that the WDFW released wolves from a UPS truck. How did that turn out?
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 18, 2013, 04:09:45 PM
mike.hope@leg.wa.gov, frank.chopp@leg.wa.gov
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 18, 2013, 04:20:13 PM
in my inbox today
WDFW NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/)
March 18, 2013
Contact, WDFW Wildlife Program, 360-902-2515
WDFW schedules meeting in Colville
on wolves' impact on game species
OLYMPIA - The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) will hold a public meeting March 27 in Colville to discuss the potential impact of wolves on area game species such as deer and elk.
The meeting is scheduled from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Colville Ag Trade Center, 317 West Astor Ave.
State and local WDFW wildlife managers will present information on monitoring efforts in northeast Washington along with population trends and harvest data for white-tailed deer, elk and moose. They'll also discuss the status of wolves in the region and the impact wolves have had on deer and elk populations in other western states.
Dave Ware, WDFW game manager, said the department has not yet documented any measureable impacts from wolves on game species in Washington, but recognizes that reports from other states have raised public concerns.
"We want to talk to people in northeast Washington about this issue, because that's the area of the state that has the largest number of wolves," Ware said. "We'd encourage area residents who have concerns to attend this meeting."
Post by: boneaddict on March 18, 2013, 04:22:48 PM
Post by: waterdoctor on March 18, 2013, 05:02:48 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 18, 2013, 06:24:44 PM
On March 8 the bill passed the Senate; yeas, 25; nays, 23; absent, 0; excused, 1. The bill was referred to the House Agriculture and Natural resources committee. A public hearing for the bill is scheduled for Wednesday, March 20 at 8:00 AM. You are welcomed and encouraged to come testify. You can track bills from home here; https://dlr.leg.wa.gov/user/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fbilltracking%2fdefault.aspx. As the bill moves forward you should receive an email update.
If you will be visiting Olympia please let me know. I will not vote on this bill unless it comes to the House Floor for a vote, however, I will take your thoughts into consideration should that occur.
In liberty,
Elizabeth Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James,
I support giving landowners/ranchers the ability to protect the livestock they are required to assure are cared for humanely. I oppose wolves even being in our state and will continue to support legislation/policies that protect citizens and their families, pets, and livestock from predation by all wild carnivores.
Ed
Representative Ed Orcutt
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 19, 2013, 08:41:28 AM
Wednesday March 20
Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee – House Hearing Room B – 8 a.m.
Protecting Domestic Animals Against Gray Wolf Attacks – Public Hearing on Senate Bill 5187
Acquisition of Habitat & Recreation Lands by the State – Public Hearing on Senate Bill 5054
Derelict and Abandoned Vessels in State Waters – Public Hearing on Senate Bill 5663
Post by: Special T on March 19, 2013, 09:26:48 AM
Post by: wolfbait on March 20, 2013, 04:15:38 PM
Post by: Special T on March 20, 2013, 08:06:07 PM
Post by: wolfbait on March 20, 2013, 09:10:57 PM
by JAKE WHITTENBERG / KING 5 News
| Follow: @jakewhittenberg
KING5.com
Posted on March 20, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Updated today at 1:04 PM
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- A battle over whether to make it legal to kill wolves for protection is heating up in Olympia. At a hearing Wednesday, legislators heard from ranchers who say if the laws don’t change, they’ll take matters into their own hands.
The ranchers and rural county officials didn’t travel to Olympia to put things lightly.
“Under threat of being sued, I will make that choice to act,” said West McCart, Stevens County Commissioner.
Many spoke out in support of a bill allowing ranchers to kill attacking wolves. A separate bill would add wolves to the state’s list of game animals.
“The wolf is a predator,” said Ray Campbell, Okanogan County Commissioner. “It’s not a magnificent wonder of nature placed on earth for people to worship.”
Legislators from the wolf-rich east side of the state are making these bills a priority. They save wolves are increasingly dangerous to livestock and humans. Several agencies, including the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, support killing the wolf for protection, saying it would not affect wolf recovery.
But activists say the bill violates the state’s wolf protection plan. Some ranching families are still trying to find a way for cattle and wolves to co-exist.
“The cattlemen have to, in my opinion, be more willing to possibly change some of their practices even though that’s not going to be as easy as a lot of people think it should be,” said Dave Hendrick, Conservation Northwest board member.
Also in the audience was John Stevie and his dog, Shelby, the Siberian Husky attacked by wolves 10 days ago on the family’s back porch in Okanogan County.
“It had her by the head on the porch,” said Stevie. “They’re not even afraid of you. They will sit there and they will watch you, and they will pace back and forth and they will stand their ground.”
Okanogan County commissioners say it’s reason like these they want to declare a state of emergency if the bill doesn’t pass, so the ranchers can protect their livelihood and their life.
“I will protect my son,” said Stevie. “Whether this bill goes through or not, I’m not going to let this happen again.”
The bill has already passed through the Republican state Senate. KING 5 sources say it’s likely there will not be enough votes in the House to make it law.
http://www.king5.com/news/environment/Battle-to-legally-kill-wolves-for-protection-heats-up-in-Olympia-199220891.html (http://www.king5.com/news/environment/Battle-to-legally-kill-wolves-for-protection-heats-up-in-Olympia-199220891.html)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have talk to several people in the last six years who had wolves attack or kill their dog in the Methow Valley.
John Stevie is the only one who wasn't afraid to stand up for what he beleived in. He alone is the reason that WDFW was not able to hide this attack. :tup:
For those of you who think WDFW is coming around to your way of thinking, you have alot to learn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank You, for your help Elkaholic daWg, you are a stout post in the truth over wolves!
I also want to thank all of you who sent letters ect. or called in and support of SB 5187. Regardless if it passes or not, I think many people felt and now feel even stronger that they will not allow WDFW's wolves to mangle and finally kill their pets or livestock without retaliation against the wolf/wolves responsible. Plus I think WDFW now realize that many people who wouldn't have in the past, will now comfront them. :tup: :tup:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dale, It was great talking with you on the phone the other night, keep the letters going. Maybe some day WDFW will hire you as one of their wolf chasers. Hell, you're not too old to go to college.
Thank You, for the privilege of posting on your site. :tup: Todd
Post by: wolfbait on March 20, 2013, 09:15:07 PM
They are NO WHERE NEAR the number of wolves in the valley in their cute little counts. Its interesting looking at the slopes along lookout which would historically hold hundreds and hundreds of deer this time of year. Now there are fewer than what you can count on your two hands. BRILLIANT!
Good to know they are going to take care of him Wolfbait. Make sure you keep "wolfbait" fenced on your front porch becasue it is your responsibility you know. :rolleyes:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs9.postimage.org%2F5d22v2gb3%2FIMG_7811.jpg&hash=920f2f37ea0f57e30b91b7437f10e071ad89ee55)
My dogs are well protected Bone! The last few nights something has been after our new stray cat, last night "the cat" let out a screech that brought me to the window with my new everything gun. I slid the window back ever so slowly and squeezed one off. A few secounds later the wife said, the neighbor "might' have gotten a new big black dog with a long bushy tail. And I said yep he might have, but he sure doesn't like the cat anymore. The neighbor's new dog was leaving at a rapid rate of speed yipping at every jump. Life in the Methow is never boring!
I found out today the neighbor didn't get a new dog. I wonder if it might have been one of Fitkin's dogs? At any rate I'm sure that WDFW know where all of their dogs are, they just don't know how many they have anymore.
Post by: KFhunter on March 20, 2013, 09:33:58 PM
Post by: boneaddict on March 21, 2013, 04:45:27 AM
NICE gun. Someone asks about sweeping the porch, that would come to mind. :)
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 21, 2013, 06:04:44 AM
Post by: motg9_6 on March 21, 2013, 06:30:46 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 21, 2013, 06:47:38 AM
just a thought if the wolves in washington are coming from canada what about the wolves in oregon????? pacific ocean????
ID
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on March 21, 2013, 07:43:23 AM
Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
Post by: MtnMuley on March 21, 2013, 08:09:07 AM
Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
I've met him several times. He's pathetic at best. Give him a dream, such as a wolverine, and you've got your man. Although he fits in well in the Methow country these days, he doesn't fit in at all for managing one of the states biggest mule deer herds and other wildlife in this region.
Post by: boneaddict on March 21, 2013, 10:18:21 AM
Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
If I am one of those morons, I'd say yes, I probably do. I often believe he is so focused on a vision, that he really doesn't grasp what is happening out there, or want to acknowledge what is really happening. I suppose that can be a fault to anyone in research. Sometimes it would be best if biologists would put their textbooks down and get out from behind the desk and go take a looksie.
Anecdotally I'll give you an example. One of the biologists contacted my Father as he heard he had seen the wolves or something. Maybe it was inspired from on here, I don't know. Anyway he called and in the conversation he noted that he had been there " studying the lookout pack for two years", YET "had not even seen any of the wolves yet." It was interesting when we told him that we were watching three of them out the window when he called and were looking at them as we talked to him on the phone. :)
Interesting enough, the put on their cross country skies the next day and went for a looksie, promptly trespassing on Bernard Thurlows land WITHOUT permission. I suppose when on official business, you don't need to have permission. :chuckle:
Post by: wolfbait on March 21, 2013, 11:48:38 AM
Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
Scott Fitkin hasn't been honest with the people of WA, WAcoyote, and when he has to testify under oath he isn't going to be anyones night in shining armor, and I'm quite sure WDFW will be in the same cesspool.
How long did you think WDFW and those who touted the lies of the USFWs, Conservation NW and Defenders of Wildlife would hold up? Did you think they would go on forever? Did you think the myth that all that was needed was to create more habitat for deer, elk etc. and the wolves and wildlife would somehow prove WY, MT and Idaho wrong?
With seventeen plus years of wolf facts on the ground in WY, MT, and Idaho the wolves have made liars out of everyone who promoted them, even David Mech finally admitted that he lied to further his agenda. Of course Mech really didn't have a choice the wolves had already proved him to be a liar, what a way to end a great career.
The I told you so's aren't any real pleasure for anyone including me, what we have now is an out of control wolf population in WA and just like the USFWS original wolf introduction, WDFW have lied about the true estimate of wolves. They refuse to confirm wolf packs and wolf attacks on pets and livestock until they are forced to so. They have been lying about the impact the wolves have already had on Washington's game herds.
The Methow Valley is the perfect example of what is happening to the rest of WA as we speak. Every year Scott Fitkin runs to the local paper with a good report on his deer count and the deer hunt in the fall, and we have far less deer then the year before. Fitkin likes to use wording like this to describe deer hunts in the Methow "for the amount of hunters we had it was a very good deer season". This year if twenty people show up in the Methow to hunt deer and they kill ten bucks, Fitkin can once again run to the local paper and say, "for the amount of hunters that showed up deer hunting was great". In reallity the wolves have decimated the Methow deer herd, and WDFW pretend all is going well.
Why do you suppose WDFW is now showing concern over wolves killing the game herds? Do you honestly beleive their BS that the wolves double last year? If WDFW were truely honest they would have said WA now has seven hundred plus wolves, and they are growing beyond our happiest dreams. We will now need more money.
Post by: Special T on March 21, 2013, 11:55:00 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 21, 2013, 12:03:11 PM
Well if you read just a few of the stories stated above you will get an indication. I have met and talked to him on the phone. So if you believe the kind of stuff that spews out of his mouth you will know he is completely full of it. Every year he states that the methow herd is in great shape. If you had any history what so ever of the Methow herd you would call B.S. too. He has the responsibility to see the herd succeed not to put the kind of krap out there to sell lisc, permits, and tags. Go ahead and ask some of the Wildlife officers what they think of him.Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
Post by: MtnMuley on March 21, 2013, 01:01:18 PM
Go ahead and ask some of the Wildlife officers what they think of him.
:lol4:
Post by: Special T on March 21, 2013, 01:27:11 PM
Post by: idaho guy on March 21, 2013, 05:13:38 PM
Post by: kentrek on March 21, 2013, 05:29:52 PM
I would recomend you washington hunters band together and make your voice heard. I cant believe that some of the hunters on here are calling the wolf native and came from canada. and telling people to put fences up to keep wolves out-ridiculouse and you would not keep the wolf out. I have six dogs and four hounds for hunting cats and bears. I keep my hunting dogs kenneled but if wolves wanted in it would just make it easier for them to kill my dogs. Wolves would get in and my dogs couldnt get out. They planted wolves in central idaho and I rode in to the selway 32 miles about 7 years ago couldnt even find an elk turd. Once they cleaned the elk out there they went north to the clearwater cleared out those elk. Jumped north into the st joe and are hurting that herd. Now they are all over north Idaho and guess what they are reducing our elk seasons! Wolves were in my neighbors pasture a few weeks ago and I am just a litttle north of Hayden Lake. Once they put a beating on our Idaho elk they jumped over to wa and or to see what they could eat there. They are way more harmfull than predators like lions, bears etc because they reproduce so fast -big litters often. This whole protection of predators thing is just a way to trash a 100 years of good big game management. Which was to sell licenses to hunters to pay to manage for a surplus population of game for the future. And creating abundant wildlife for non hunters to enjoy however they want. First they got rid of houng hunting for lions and now they want 15 bredding pairs of wolves. Scary. Just my two cents but I would get behind bearpaw and the others on here and help them fight to control your predators. I dont have anything against wdfw and actually love their youth hunt opportunites. They have allowed my son to hunt big game at 8 instead of waiting till 12 in Idaho and its been lots of fun. Just saying you wont have any hunting left if you dont get together and fight to control the predators. Even when you can legally shoot them they are tough to hunt. I have been doing my best and have killed one and that was in Ak! Just to scare you i think 379 wolves were killed in Idaho last year and a biologist told my buddy that at best kept our population level but didnt reduce the numbers much.
x2
Post by: Special T on March 22, 2013, 09:52:03 AM
There are just too many basic questions that either have no answer, or ones so convoluted that you have to question peoples sanity.
Post by: bearpaw on March 22, 2013, 09:28:40 PM
Time for Fitkin to go back to working at the Honey Pot cleanup where he knows more than he does at his current job.Have you met him? He's a good biologist. Do you actually believe that the morons posting stuff on here as gospel know the wolves over there better than he does??
There are some WDFW personnel dragging their feet as if trying to hide wolves in Washington. Everyone knows he is a wolf lover, look at all the members on here reporting wolves all over the Okanogan. He has been claiming there are only 2 or 3 wolves in OK county, give me a break, he is an insult to the intelligence of the people of Washington. It's time to clean out the WDFW of people who are not doing their job. I don't care how nice a guy he is, his lack of action or purposeful hiding of wolves needs to come to an end. Either get these wolves confirmed now or find a different job.
The future of hunting, ranching, and a peaceful stroll in the countryside is at stake. :twocents:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 23, 2013, 10:08:10 AM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,121284.msg1602543.html#new (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,121284.msg1602543.html#new)
Post by: wolfbait on March 23, 2013, 09:56:06 PM
The Yellowstone and Idaho wolf introduction story starts out with the USFWS and Defenders of Wildlife.
When WDFW announced the first wolf pack in seventy years in 2008, it was the start of many wolf lies WDFW would tell. WDFW's wolf history proves that they were pushing wolves as far back as the 1990's.
From aticles of the past, Scott Fitkin, and Harriet Allen, state biologists for WDFW were studing and collaring wolves in the 1990's, while the USFWS along with Defenders of Wildlife were pushing the wolf propaganda, the same propaganda the USFWS's Alberta wolves have proven to be lies in the last seventeen years.
Who is Harriet Allen?
Rare Wolf Pups To Be Isolated, Photographed-Sunday, June 3, 1990
State and federal biologists in May located the gray wolf den containing pups by howling at them and getting distinctive barks and howls in return. "It is the first confirmation in 15 years that wolves are living in Washington", says Harriet Allen, state biologist http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900603&slug=1075265 (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900603&slug=1075265)
Fourth state wolf pack confirmed-July 05, 2011
"The discovery of another resident wolf pack clearly indicates that "wolves are returning to Washington state naturally," said WDFW Director Phil Anderson. "Their return highlights the need to continue efforts to finalize a state wolf conservation and management plan that will establish state recovery objectives and describe options for addressing wolf-livestock and wolf-ungulate management issues."
"Harriet Allen, WDFW's threatened and endangered species program manager", said the search for the Teanaway pack was prompted by reports of wolves in the area from citizens and state and federal agency personnel. Remote, motion-triggered cameras were deployed by multiple agencies and private groups. Images of wolf-like animals were captured on cameras placed in the area by Conservation Northwest, a private, non-profit organization. The group's Citizen Wildlife Monitoring Program also provided the first images of the Lookout Pack pups three years ago.
"We appreciate the efforts of Conservation Northwest and our partner agencies, the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "to help us document wolves as they return naturally to Washington," Allen said. "Documenting packs and learning about territory use, productivity and survival will help us understand how wolves are using Washington habitat. That will help us protect them and ultimately determine when we reach recovery goals http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/jul0511a/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/jul0511a/) Wolves returning "Naturally" twice in one article, Allen?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolves In Cascades -- First Sighting In 15 Years-May 25, 1990
Wolf pups are living in a den deep in the North Cascade Mountains, the first sighting in 15 years in a state where wolves were virtually exterminated decades ago, biologists said today
Cindy Barry, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, said biologists ``heard the yips of the wolves'' and could tell from the sounds that some were pups and some were adults. ``They didn't actually see the wolves,'' she said, but officials still consider it a sighting.
``This sighting confirms that we have the habitat for wolves,'' Gastellun said. He said wolves feed largely on small animals such as squirrels http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900603&slug=1075265 (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19900603&slug=1075265)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endangered Gray Wolf Trapped Near Mt. Baker
February 5, 1992
For the first time in anyone's memory, wildlife biologists have captured an endangered gray wolf in Washington.
State Wildlife Department biologists said they trapped the animal, a healthy 56-pound female, near Mount Baker last Friday. The wolf was fitted with a radio collar and released the next day on national forest land a few miles away.
biologists Jon Almack and Scott Fitkin succeeded in luring the animal into a fenced swimming-pool area, using a fish carcass as bait. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920205&slug=1473981 (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920205&slug=1473981)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolves Coming Back To Cascades
December 6, 1992
TWISP, Okanogan County - We may not be dancing with wolves, but they're here, their numbers are growing and it is possible to coexist with them in relative peace.
In the Okanogan, one or more wolves have been spotted in five separate areas since 1989.
The plan is to let the wolves - moving into old haunts south of Canada after hunting stopped there in the 1970s - reproduce themselves, said Jon Almak, a state Department of Wildlife biologist.
Biologists are trying to write a wolf-recovery plan for Washington.
Originally planned as part of a recovery program for the northern Rockies, where wolves were brought in, the effort could become unique to Washington because of the apparently burgeoning population.
For example, 100 sightings were reported in 1981, and last year there were 200, ranging as far south as Mount St. Helens, Almak said.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource). … ug=1528536
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray Wolves' Return Subject Of Monday Meeting-April 17, 1992
State wildlife agents already have identified six packs of wolves in Washington's Cascades, and more are expected to migrate from Canada to the state's protected forests.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920417&slug=1486887 (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920417&slug=1486887)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norm Dicks Puts Gray-Wolf Study On The Fast Track -- Reintroduction Wasn't Priority For Agencies-July 14, 1997
Reintroduction of wolves to the Olympics wasn't a high priority among federal agencies or many Northwest wolf advocates until Dicks, urged by Defenders of Wildlife, an East Coast-based conservation group, got excited about the idea. "Wolves in the Olympics haven't been our priority," said Jim Michaels, endangered-species coordinator for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Western Washington field office. "But dollars certainly are very scarce and competitive for this stuff. If you've got a congressman who is interested, you better snag the chance."
Ed Bangs, head of wolf recovery for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the agency's priority is restoring wolves to large land areas where they can link up with existing populations. The Olympics, as a wolf habitat, is virtually an island, and restoration of wolf populations there requires direct human intervention.
Argues Mitch Friedman, director of the Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, "Wolves in the Olympics make perfect political sense because you've got a congressman who wants them in his district. But biologically speaking, why are we starting another batch of cookies while we let the ones we've already got in the oven burn?"
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19970714&slug=2549520 (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19970714&slug=2549520)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conservation groups want U.S. to restore gray wolves in state-November 1, 2002
Two conservation groups are calling on the federal government to restore gray wolves to Washington state, saying it's time to "hear the call of the wild again" in Western Washington forests.
Defenders of Wildlife and the Northwest Ecosystem Alliance said yesterday they have sent a petition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, requesting that the agency restore and protect gray wolves under the Endangered Species Act.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20021101&slug=graywolves01m (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20021101&slug=graywolves01m)
Mitch Friedman is the executive director of Conservation Northwest (known first as Greater Ecosystem Alliance, then Northwest Ecosystem Alliance),
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008
DNA tests showed that the wolves originated from a population in the northern British Columbia and Alberta provinces of Canada.
"This is a natural colonization," said Fitkin. "The wolves are naturally immigrating." Fitkin and his team will continue to monitor the movements of the collared wolves and wolf pups as they move around the summer rendezvous area.
"I've been waiting for this for 18 years," said Fitkin, who said he was very excited by the findings of the investigation. Fitkin has been involved in wolf research in the North Cascades since 1991.
Anyone with concerns about wolves may contact Fitkin at ---------.
Read Conservation Northwest's press release >>
Posted by Suzanne Stone on 05:
Why does WDFW continue the rhetoric "wolves migrating to Washington naturally"?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DNA confirms wolf comeback-July 24, 2008
Wildlife officials say this is the first documented resident wolf pack in Washington since the 1930s
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008069663_wolfreturn24.html (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008069663_wolfreturn24.html)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excitement, anxiety as wolves return to Washington- May 23, 2009
There has been one report of a cow possibly killed by wolves near the community, about 100 miles northeast of Seattle. But The Wenatchee World reports that had not been confirmed as of the past week.
No one has reported pets carried off by the first confirmed pack of wolves to live in Washington state since the Great Depression, state officials say.
"Well-behaved," is how state Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist Scott Fitkin describes these wolves in their first official year of residency.
"I halfway anticipated we might have had an incident with somebody's dog by now," the Winthrop biologist said. "I've been surprised at how covert they've been."
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/45923372.html (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/45923372.html)
(Actually there were a couple of dog "incidents," and the dogs lost) I wonder how many incidents have been reported, that WDFW failed to report in the last week?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collared Idaho wolves in Alberta?
A few years ago a man who worked for Canadian Wildlife, posted on a secure facebook wolf site, he said "many of the USFWS's Aberta wolves went back to Alberta, and that we would be surprised at how many times the USFWS had to come back to Canada for more wolves." He said, "it was the best money Canada ever made on wolves, selling them to the stupid USFWS."
Gray wolves can travel great distances in short periods of time. For example, one wolf that was recently radio-collared in Montana's Glacier National Park was killed a few months later 500 miles north in Canada.
WDFW's new phrase, "just passin through"? I wonder if these passin-through-wolves are headed back home to the Methow?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although wolves generally prefer to prey upon elk and deer, and although attacks on humans almost never happen, livestock owners contend that they prey indiscriminately. But Fish and Wildlife Service figures indicate that domestic livestock are rarely killed by wolves.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19910908&slug=1304367 (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19910908&slug=1304367)
The USFWS and state game agencies have been caught in so many lies, everything they say has to be verified by wolves or the public
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf kill fails to placate Washington rancher
August 9, 2012
"They distort facts so much, they've lied to us continually on this thing," he said. "First they said there was no wolves in the area. We showed them that there was. Then they said there might be wolves, but they'll never eat a cow. We showed them that they did."
McIrvin said wolf activity has been escalating. Last year 11 calves and five bulls were killed, he said. He will tally how many have been killed this year in the fall.
http://www.bluemountaineagle.com/news/state_national/wolf-kill-fails-to-placate-washington-rancher/article_f9b7ebce-e264-11e1-811c-0019bb2963f4.html?mode=print (http://www.bluemountaineagle.com/news/state_national/wolf-kill-fails-to-placate-washington-rancher/article_f9b7ebce-e264-11e1-811c-0019bb2963f4.html?mode=print)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheriff's office investigates wolf attacks-November 01, 2012
"Wolves are new to this state," Mitch Friedman, executive director of nonprofit corporation Conservation Northwest. "My understanding from the writing of experts in the Rockies is it takes a lot of experience to identify a wolf kill."
http://www.capitalpress.com/washington/mw-CPOW-Wolves-102912-art (http://www.capitalpress.com/washington/mw-CPOW-Wolves-102912-art)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you can see from the information I have provided, the wolf situation in WA state is a Top-Down problem. Scott Fitkin is just doing his job. He is a tool and not a very good one for WDFW as he has been proven to be dishonest on several occasion. WDFW is now having the same problems as Fitkin---they have lost their credibility. I have talked with other WDFW employees who disagree with WDFW's handling of wolves in WA and their hands are tied when the truth is being told. In other words, their jobs are on the line. The recent wolf attack on John's dog may be the beginning of WDFW's glass house shattering all over hells half acre. Reports of other wolf attacks that WDFW had hidden to protect their wolves reputation can't be doing them any good either.
I have also heard there are some biologists who work for WDFW that believe wolves should be hunted as a predator. Being that wolves are an agenda driven endangered species, it is better that they are not heard making such statements to the public.
What is and has happened in the Methow Valley is happening all over WA. So far WDFW has been able to cover it up with BS, but wolves are now eating their way into the public eye in such a way it will soon be hard to hide and a truer number of wolves will begin to become evident. WDFW's wolf count is a joke and they know it. What will their new wolf story be? Remember Idaho, you can't stack wolves on top of wolves?
WDFW has the play book of the original wolf introduction to go by, and so far they have done a very good job. They refuse to confirm wolf packs, they have ignored the impacts wolves are having on game herds, and they refuse to confirm livestock and pets killed by wolves unless they are forced to do so.
Do you think the wolf problem will get better? How many people think the wolves in WA will ever be controlled? Controlled anywhere for that matter hunted as a big game animal?
WDFW has been buying up land all over WA. Many hunters, etc.feel that is great news, but what happens when there is nothing left to hunt? Will all of this land be shut down to public use? Why does WDFW need so much land if they are promoting and protecting wolves, wolves that will decimate all wildlife? Why haven't we heard anything from Defenders of Wildlife? Are they letting Conservation NW pack their water while they wait in the shadows for suing times that WA is sure to experience?
What happened to WDFW's wolves of the 1990's?
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. m: http://www.law.cornell.edu (http://www.law.cornell.edu)
Post by: Curly on March 24, 2013, 10:33:26 AM
Endangered Gray Wolf Trapped Near Mt. Baker
By Eric Pryne
For the first time in anyone's memory, wildlife biologists have captured an endangered gray wolf in Washington.
State Wildlife Department biologists said they trapped the animal, a healthy 56-pound female, near Mount Baker last Friday. The wolf was fitted with a radio collar and released the next day on national forest land a few miles away.
That wolf was trapped and collared about a year after my brother and I saw 3 wolves up near Lk Wenatchee. I wonder if one of the wolves I saw was the one they trapped?
I also wonder what info they gathered about the wolves from that pack?
Post by: huntnphool on March 24, 2013, 11:38:41 AM
Additionally, according to the WDFW estimate, this type of occurence will likely happen once, maybe twice a year, and its a acceptable part of the overall plan. Now that its already happened, why worry about the rest of the year. :tup:
Lastly, lets just get to the 15 breeding pairs so they can be "managed" and all this can stop. I mean who can argue the logic by a couple of our members that adding a lot more wolves will make the entire situation better........brilliant!!!
Post by: wolfbait on March 24, 2013, 03:40:54 PM
I wonder if WDFW has ever seen the connection with their wolf releases on graveled roads and mowed grass? Do you think they will ever get the hint?
I can hardly wait till WDFW and the USFS come out with their wolverine report. I can almost hear WDFW's office report now: Our wolves ate all of the transplanted wolverines, Memo-Call the Canadians and tell them we need some more wolverines, and make sure they are "lactating". Call Andy and Conservation NW and have them on site for the release, and make Damn sure you drag them off the road and into the grass before filming.
Post by: idaho guy on March 25, 2013, 12:16:09 PM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on March 25, 2013, 12:30:35 PM
Do you have any evidence of these releases? You have been beating this drum for years and have never produced any facts about a release???? You were also preparing a court case to blow the top off... what ever happened with all that?
I wonder if WDFW has ever seen the connection with their wolf releases on graveled roads and mowed grass? Do you think they will ever get the hint?
Post by: Don Fischer on March 25, 2013, 01:39:03 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on March 25, 2013, 01:45:29 PM
To bad you didn't have a gun handy. You could have shot that mountain lion and tell them that not for your dog, it would have got you. or just bury it and forget happened. I like wolf's, think they are beautiful. But they can't live in civilization.
WTH is he talking about, cougar, burying, and liking wolves? :dunno: :tree1:
Post by: huntnphool on March 25, 2013, 01:52:22 PM
I read something about a bill to transfer wolves to westside of washington. Thats the perfect plan. I will support and give money to have wolves dropped off all over King county and why stop there! I think we should share the dream of living with wolves with California and the Eastern states too! Finally a logical plan, share wolves with every liberal city in America. Its only fair if they love wolves so much that we should give them a bunch. why be selfish? Help us all out on managing wolves if we could let them live with wolves for a while too.They don't need a bill, it's written into the proposal, they can move them anywhere in the state.
Post by: Kola16 on March 25, 2013, 01:58:00 PM
To bad you didn't have a gun handy. You could have shot that mountain lion and tell them that not for your dog, it would have got you. or just bury it and forget happened. I like wolf's, think they are beautiful. But they can't live in civilization.
Another!!! :tree1: :bash:
Post by: Curly on March 25, 2013, 02:15:18 PM
I don't see anything wrong with what Don Fischer said. He is just saying that if WDFW was insisting that it was a cougar that attacked the dog, that he should have just used the SSS method. That's how I take it anyway. :twocents:To bad you didn't have a gun handy. You could have shot that mountain lion and tell them that not for your dog, it would have got you. or just bury it and forget happened. I like wolf's, think they are beautiful. But they can't live in civilization.
Another!!! :tree1: :bash:
Post by: Kola16 on March 25, 2013, 06:51:08 PM
I don't see anything wrong with what Don Fischer said. He is just saying that if WDFW was insisting that it was a cougar that attacked the dog, that he should have just used the SSS method. That's how I take it anyway. :twocents:To bad you didn't have a gun handy. You could have shot that mountain lion and tell them that not for your dog, it would have got you. or just bury it and forget happened., think they are beautiful. But they can't live in civilization.
Another!!! :tree1: :bash:
Maybe. I can't understand the grammar at all, but to say "I like wolf's" :dunno:
Post by: Sniper101 on March 26, 2013, 02:28:45 AM
Post by: wolfbait on March 26, 2013, 09:14:10 AM
on March 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM
BAKER CITY, Ore. — DNA samples may tell whether it was a wolf that attacked a pet dog about 10 miles west of Baker City and was chased off by gunfire from the dog's owner.
Jay Ogg said he had just let out the family's two dogs on Sunday morning when he heard one squeal.
Ogg told the Baker City Herald said he looked outside and saw what he described as a wolf, about 20 to 30 feet from the back porch.
In its mouth was the head of Taz, a Shih Tzu.
Ogg said he went outside and fired his 10 mm Glock pistol in the direction of the animal, not intending to hit it but just to scare it away.
After letting go of the dog, Ogg said, the animal moved toward his wife, Genie, but ran after a few more rounds.
"It wasn't scared of us a bit," he said.
The home is at the base of the Elkhorn Mountains. District wildlife biologist Brian Ratliff says the agency hasn't confirmed that wolves are in the range, but there's no reason they couldn't be.
A search of nearby woods turned up tracks from two "large canids," Ratliff said.
He's sending feces and hair he found for DNA testing at the University of Idaho and expects results in about two weeks.
The Oggs moved to the house in August with their three children.
Jay Ogg has set up motion-sensing trail cameras near his home. Ratliff said his agency will install cameras on nearby public land.
Ogg said he has seen large canine tracks in the snow this winter. Neighbor Raymond Griner said he saw an animal three weeks ago he figured was "just an overgrown coyote," but he wonders now whether it was a wolf.
As of the end of 2012, the state had counted 46 wolves in northeast Oregon. That's the minimum number the state has direct evidence for. That doesn't include the noted wandering wolf OR-7, who recently returned from California. http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2013/03/owner_suspects_wolf_in_attack.html (http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2013/03/owner_suspects_wolf_in_attack.html)
Post by: Kola16 on March 26, 2013, 08:32:58 PM
hes being sarcastic and saying he should of shot what wdfw called a "cougar" , makes sense if you have any brains, and yes wolves are beautiful creatures you gotta admit, and I like them to in the sense that their pelts would be a perfect decoration in my house, so how you take his perspective is all about YOUR perspective and wits....which most of you seem to lack calling fellow hunters tree humpers. Dont get me wrong, I hate what wolves do as well but usewhat brains you have.Use what brains I have :rolleyes: If you are going to tell me to use my brain; check your grammar first. Maybe you should explain the "I like wolf's" part of it, which was my main point :hello:
I have to admit that wolves are beautiful creatures? Have you seen what wolves do.......