Post by: wolfbait on February 09, 2010, 07:42:38 AM
February 9, 2010
There is a secret, hiding in plain sight, that every American should know about. Your life may depend on it.
In the mid-1990's, wolves were "re-introduced" to areas of the West under the auspices of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in accordance with the "Endangered Species Act".
I will digress here for a moment and explain why quotes are used around the word "re-introduced". The word re-introduced means to bring back a species indigenous to the area from which it has disappeared or is in danger of becoming extinct.
The wolf indigenous to most parts of the West is called the Timber Wolf or Gray Wolf (canis lupus irremotus). The male of these species, on average, is about 75 lbs; the female is smaller as is usual with most species.
In hearing about wolves invading Idaho, which has the largest contiguous wilderness area of any state in the lower 48, I kept hearing stories about huge animals. One gent told me that a wolf crossed the road in front of his pickup and stood as tall as the hood. I rather discounted it as the proverbial "fish story" where the fish gets bigger with each telling of the story. What he was describing was one big animal considering his pickup was a 4x4.
I would learn that he wasn't telling a "fish story". The wolf brought in and turned loose in the Yellowstone National Park and other parts of central Idaho is the Canadian Gray Wolf. If this article is correct, the species of wolf imported is the canis lupus occidentallis or MacKenzie Valley Wolf, a large wolf from Western Canada. One website states that this wolf was imported from Alberta. In searching, there is the canis lupus columbianus, a large wolf found in Yukon, British Columbia and Alberta. Another, canis lupus griseoalbus, is a large wolf found in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Whether one or more of these species, what is obvious is that they are not indigenous to the lower 48.
Males, on average, weigh 130 lbs, the females somewhat smaller. These animals are huge, far outweighing any dog but the mastiff breeds. Were they to stand on their hind legs, put their feet on the shoulders of most people, they would be looking down at them!
Let me be perfectly clear; the Canadian Gray Wolf is not indigenous to the lower 48 states. To claim they are a "re-introduction" is not only misleading but purposely misleading.
That would not be the first or last problem with the "re-introduction" of wolves.
In a letter, dated October 3, 1993, Mr Will Graves of Maryland wrote a letter to Ed Bangs, US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Project Leader for the introduction of the Canadian Gray, in Helena, MT. Graves, the
"author of “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages“, has studied wolves for many years. He has traveled to Russia and surrounding nations to gather information, historic documents, etc., to learn more about wolves, their diseases and the impact these animals have had on humans for centuries. This is the basis of his book." (source)
Graves' letter addressed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) presented by Bangs. In his letter, Graves expressed his concerns regarding introducing wolves to the United States period,
"I support Alternative 3, the No Wolf Alternative.
1. Diseases, Worms and Parasites. I was surprised that the DEIS did not make a detailed study on the impact issue of diseases, worms, and parasites (page 9). I believe an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) is not complete without a detailed study covering the diseases, worms and parasites that wolves would carry, harbor, and spread around in the YNP (Yellowstone National Park) and in Idaho. The study should cover the potential negative impact of these diseases on wild and domestic animals, and on humans. I believe the potential negative impact of these diseases is a valid reason not to reintroduce wolves into YNP and to Idaho."
Mr Graves concerns, outlined in the letter, while very valid, were ignored, not only by Ed Bangs but also by the USFWS.
Everyone should read Will Graves' letter. It is very important. And what it makes so very obvious is that the American people have been lied to, if only by omission, about the reality of the wolves introduced which environmentalists would have you believe was a "re-introduction" of an indigenous species.
What are the "diseases, worms and parasites" spoken of by Graves? Besides hoof and mouth disease, anthrax of a less virulent variety than the variety we are used to hearing about, Neospora caninum which causes late-term abortions in cattle, and an increased incidence of rabies, these wolves carry a parasitic tapeworm.
When most of us envision a tapeworm, we think of the kind carried by dogs and cats and for which pet owners worm them and that are very visible in the scat.
This tapeworm is of a different variety. This tapeworm is a three-millimeter-long tapeworm known as Echinococcus granulosus which causes a disease called Alveolar Hydatid Disease (also known as Cystic Hydatid Disease). The disease presents in the form of cysts in vital organs such as the liver, lungs and brain. The disease can be asymptomatic, growing and spreading for years without detection. Alveolar Hydatid Disease presented a 70% mortality rate in 1980 among Alaskan Eskimos diagnosed. More recently, some success has been achieved in treating the disease without surgery.
This parasite has been found in two-thirds of wolf carcasses examined in Idaho. From the wolf, the parasite is spread to other warm blooded animals, mostly through contact with dried wolf scat in the wild.
Infection of ungulates (hoofed animals) is obviously through air currents spreading the eggs to grass and surrounding vegetation that ungulates eat. A dog, sniffing the dried scat of a wolf, as dogs do with the scat of any animal, is sufficient to cause the eggs to go airborne, infecting the dog's nostrils, mouth and getting on the fur where they can be transmitted to anyone handling or petting the dog.
Any warm-blooded animal, wild or domestic, large or small, is susceptible as are humans.
How easy is it to contract the parasite that causes the disease? If you listen to the USFWS field biologists, and pro-wolf advocates, not very. Biologists and scientists not on the government payroll, however, say otherwise. The Centers for Disease Control has issued a warning about the disease.
Dr Val Geist, Professional Biologist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science, University of Calgary, in an e-mail to a concerned citizen, had this to say,
It is well known that domestic dogs play a very large risk factor in hydatid disease. Unlike in Northern Canada or Alaska, in the West one is dealing with much greater densities of people, dogs and carrier species such as deer or elk. High incidents of the parasite in wolves and coyotes and a high infestation rate with cysts in lungs and liver of deer and elk, put at risk the ranching, farming and rural communities. In winter time deer and elk will frequently be found on ranches close to communities. Dogs from ranches, farms and hamlets will have access to winter killed carcasses of deer and elk as well as to offal left in the field during the hunting season. Once infected with dog tape worm, the ranch and house dogs will contaminate the yard, porches, living rooms etc with hydatid eggs. There is no escape from this! Ten to twenty years down the road, hydatid disease will raise its head, in particular in persons who as toddlers crawled over floors walked over by people and dogs carrying in hydatid eggs from the outside. Please inform yourself what this is likely to mean in terms of prognosis, suffering and costs!
What does Dr Geist suggest, in dealing with the probability of coming in contact with infected animals?
"1.) Assuming the number of wolf packs can be reduced so as to retain a vibrant, abundant prey base, that developmental studies proceed on how to create bait stations that are accepted by wolves, with bait containing anti-helminthic drugs that are readily eaten by wolves. I am aware that this will not be a quick project. Rather I expect that wolves will accept bait stations, let alone the bait, only very gradually. It will take time, experimentation and sophisticated know how to make bait stations operational. However, once accepted by wolves, the bait stations will break the hydatid cycle between wolves and ungulates. Over time, this will lead to diminished infections of deer and elk, and this with re-infection with the parasite by wolves and coyotes.
2.) Unfortunately, under moist and cold conditions hydatid eggs remain viable for months and may even infect after three and a half years. Under dry, hot conditions the eggs die quickly. Burning the under story in forests will not eliminate the dangers from hydatid eggs, but will certainly reduce such. It's a policy worth looking at.
3.) Simultaneously, a thorough campaign must be initiated to regularly de-worm dogs in danger areas as well as encourage specific hygienic measures. Here it means winning the ears and the trust of the rural communities."
What are anti-helminthic drugs? They are medications that rid the animal of parasitic worms. Under this classification, there are different types of drugs depending on the parasite.
Dr Geist closed his e-mail to the concerned citizen as follows:
"Wolves have been exterminated from lived in landscapes universally because they, or their diseases, posed a serious threat to affected people, livestock and wild life. The lessons from history are that we can at best live with wolves if such are relatively few, the abundance of natural prey is high, and the risk from diseases non-existent."
Was this disease in the lower 48 before the introduction of the Canadian Gray Wolf? Previous to the introduction of this wolf, the parasite was seldom found in the lower 48 among the coyote and fox population.
That is no longer the case and the disease is now a threat, especially if the people now subjected to the growing wolf population and habitat are unaware of its presence, and especially as there is no indication that anything is being done to eradicate it.
Did the government know the concerns about diseases carried by wolves before the Canadian Gray Wolf was introduced? Considering the letter of Graves to Bangs in 1993, they obviously did.
And quite obviously, in total disregard for the health and well-being of the American people, the U.S. Government introduced the wolf on behalf of radical environmental groups.
And the government wonders why people have trust issues.
Another problem is that these wolves are predators of a different sort. As opposed to other predators like cougar and bear that kill for food, the Canadian Gray Wolf kills indiscriminately—they kill for sport; they kill because the animal is there and convenient; they kill because they want to.
There is a website, on the internet, that people who think these wolves are just harmless, nice little puppy-dog-like creatures should visit. That website is SaveElk. Right there, on the home page, is the picture of a man holding the head of an elk after wolves brought her down and ripped the fetus she carried from her body. She was then left to die and died, obviously traumatized, in the man's arms.
On that website, you will see picture after picture of cow elk from which wolves ripped the fetus and left the cow to die. The decimation of the ungulate populations in Idaho is well under way. This is the reality of wolves. Go here to see how vast the wolf activity is in Idaho.
Also there, on the home page, is the picture of the remains of a Black Labrador Retriever. The owner reached that dog within minutes of the wolf attack. All that was left was the head and spine! How would you like to find your beloved family pet like that? Would you want your children to see that?
Wolves kill for sport, often bringing an animal down, mauling it, ripping the gut open, then leaving the animal to die a slow, torturous death. This picture (used with permission) is of one such kill. That this animal died a slow death is apparent from the blood pool around it; the animal slowly bled out. There are animal carcasses, just like this one, spread all over the Idaho Wilderness area.
Another known fact about wolves that the pro-wolf advocates don't want people to know is that wolves do not necessarily kill their prey before feeding on it! Here is a picture of a deer, still alive, her back quarters mangled beyond recovery, as the wolf walks away. That deer obviously died as slow and as torturous a death as the elk pictured here.
The Canadian Gray Wolf is driving the coyotes, foxes and native wolf out of areas they take over for the simple reason that if they remain, the Canadian Gray Wolf will kill them. The same is true of the cougar, bobcat, lynx, wolverine, bear and other predatory animal populations.
Timber Wolves, indigenous to the Pacific Northwest, are now truly endangered; a fact which the pro-wolf advocates are not concerned about, making it obvious that their agenda has nothing to do with restoring an "endangered" species. Pro-wolf advocates have made it clear that implementing a radical environmental agenda is the sole goal of their efforts; that "wolf recovery" has been a fraud from the start.
One rabid pro-wolf advocate filed a freedom of information request on the Idaho Fish and Game Department, to acquire the names of all who filled their legally obtained, and paid for, wolf tag in 2009. That individual then posted those names on a website that masked his identity. But, being unable to contain his glee at having done this, he then took out an ad in the local newspaper, pointing people to the website where he listed the names. While he claimed his actions were not intended to incite harassment, he was also quoted as saying,
"They're paying for the privilege to use a resource that belongs to all of us … They've made a conscious decision to do something that other people in this state disapprove of."
But he didn't intend to incite harassment? Really?
Did this pro-wolf advocate request of the Idaho Fish and Game Department to know who all had filled tags to legally hunt deer, elk, moose and bear? After all, there might be those who "disapprove" of hunting those, too; and aren't deer, elk, moose and bear just as much (if not more) a "resource" as wolves?
This individual, who would have you believe he didn't do this to incite harassment, did not, however, request that information. Quite obviously, his agenda has nothing to do with conservation, the eco-system, or the environment. If he did, he would care about the decimation of Idaho ungulate populations by wolves.
Like Al Gore and his "global warming" agenda based on pseudo-science, on which he has made millions, the pro-wolf advocates have an agenda which is about money and control, just like global warming is.
I've heard a lot of people compare wolves to those nice little neighborhood puppy dogs. The number of people who have been attacked by wolves is growing. The number who have been killed is also growing. In his letter to Bangs, Graves pointed out that people in certain parts of Siberia do not venture outside at night because, if they do, their odds of being attacked by a wolf are substantial. Here is part of an e-mail from a Washingtonian,
"I can tell you I have had firsthand experience with these wolves in Washington, we have had them looking in our house windows, they have killed deer within a 100 yards of our house, I have shot at them to scare them off and they turn and lope right at me going past me at 50 yards. These wolves are not afraid of people and they are huge. We don’t go out at night to let the dogs pee without taking a big flashlight and gun, I spend many nights at the barns watching out for our stock when the wolves are in close to us. One of the reasons that the wolf diseases will spread and be easy to come in contact with will be that there is too high of a population of wolves."
If a Canadian Gray Wolf can crush the rib bones of a deer, just how safe do you truly believe you are if you come face to face with this predator without the means to defend yourself? If three wolves are not afraid to take on the majestic Grizzly, do you think they are afraid to take you on?
What chances do you have of surviving Hydatid Disease if contracted? Do you really believe that, once it invades the population, it will be given the same attention as, say, AIDs?
The bottom line here is that the American people have been, and are being, lied to about the wolf and the introduction of it to the lower 48 states. That they are being lied to is pretty good indication that the real agenda is other than the one presented.
Get informed, get involved. Save our country for our people, not the rabid, radical environmentalists who have a goal that has nothing to do with freedom, liberty or justice but everything to do with money and control.
Credit for much of the material used in this article goes to SaveElk.com who has done a tremendous job of bringing a lot of information together that tells a story counter to the one people are being told by the government, the media, and the environmentalists.
Another excellent website is Washington Wolf Information.
© 2010 Lynn M Stuter – All Rights Reserved.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 09, 2010, 08:46:49 AM
Males, on average, weigh 130 lbs Funny that the LARGEST wolf harvested in MT was 117 lbs...what gives?
Ten to twenty years down the road, hydatid disease will raise its head, in particular in persons who as toddlers crawled over floors walked over by people and dogs carrying in hydatid eggs from the outside. It's been ~15 years since introduction...where is this horrible pandemic worm?
I've heard a lot of people compare wolves to those nice little neighborhood puppy dogs. The number of people who have been attacked by wolves is growing. The number who have been killed is also growing. In his letter to Bangs, Graves pointed out that people in certain parts of Siberia do not venture outside at night because, if they do, their odds of being attacked by a wolf are substantial. Here is part of an e-mail from a Washingtonian, It's true that wolves in Siberia attack people...had they introduced wolves from Siberia I would be nervous. How many attacks have these introduced wolves been responsible for in the US?
"I can tell you I have had firsthand experience with these wolves in Washington, we have had them looking in our house windows, they have killed deer within a 100 yards of our house, I have shot at them to scare them off and they turn and lope right at me going past me at 50 yards. These wolves are not afraid of people and they are huge. We don't go out at night to let the dogs pee without taking a big flashlight and gun, I spend many nights at the barns watching out for our stock when the wolves are in close to us. One of the reasons that the wolf diseases will spread and be easy to come in contact with will be that there is too high of a population of wolves." Pictures please...I think I've heard this "tame as a housecat" discussion before but somehow there are never pictures to show these wolves so close to the house...what gives? If they're so close and tame take a picture.
If a Canadian Gray Wolf can crush the rib bones of a deer, just how safe do you truly believe you are if you come face to face with this predator without the means to defend yourself? If three wolves are not afraid to take on the majestic Grizzly, do you think they are afraid to take you on? Wait a minute...I thought they were in your yard with mundane regularity- how have you survived so long against those odds? :rolleyes:
Saveelk is BS propaganda and is about as accurate with facts as the PETA website. :twocents: I'm not really pro wolf, but I appreciate factual information to make an informed desision. I also see them as another big game animal, not a bloodthirsty killer. They do what predators do...
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 09, 2010, 08:58:39 AM
http://www.westernwolves.org/index.php/hunting-in-wolf-country (http://www.westernwolves.org/index.php/hunting-in-wolf-country)
Wild Lands, Wolves and Wapiti
by Corey Fisher, Montana Hunter
I didn’t grow up around wolves, or elk. I was raised in rural southern Michigan where the biggest wild canines were coyotes and the whitetail deer—while corn fed and fat—were nothing compared to elk. It was farm country and the big patches of timber were only 40 acres. A desire for open spaces and big country took me to college in northern Wisconsin, where the Chequamegon National Forest served as my introduction to our precious public lands heritage and also my first encounter with wolves.
While deer hunting the fall of my freshman year, I was watching the sunset and waited for a buck to come out of a cedar swamp when a sound from a couple ridges away sent shivers up my spine. These were not coyotes yapping as I was used to, but honest-to-God wolves howling through the cold November air. Walking out of the woods to my truck, I realized that I wasn’t alone at the top of the food chain in the Northwoods. I knew that there were a couple of packs in the region, but the actual confirmation that we were hunting in the same territory was thrilling. I’d come looking for big, wild country and I’d found it. Knowing that these animals were still here made me look at my new hunting area in a different way. This was a place that was whole—where the workings of nature still ticked. The fact that I, too, was part of it all was uplifting.
Later, I found myself lucky enough to be living and working in western Montana. Ever since my youth, spent chasing whitetails in woodlots, I’d wanted to hunt elk. The mystique of the backcountry and stories of wapiti that roamed the mountains beckoned me.
Searching the ample public lands in my new home, I focused on the Pintler and Sapphire Ranges as the place where I would hunt elk and fulfill a lifelong desire. I’d heard about the wolves in the region, and how they affected elk movement, but there seemed to be plenty of elk around so I hunted them…and hunted and hunted and hunted. Sure, I found elk, mostly flashes of tan crashing through dense stands of lodgepole as I spooked yet another herd. As the season wore down, I realized that hiking for miles on end wasn’t going to cut it: I had to slow down and work to get in close if I was going to kill an elk.
After making a personal pact to stop chasing elk as if it were some cross-country marathon, and actually start hunting, I found myself slowly stalking down a ridge on a snowy afternoon in late November. Elk sign was everywhere: droppings, tracks, beds. But the snow showed their age and I was there a day late; another hundred yards and the reason was clear. Several sets of wolf tracks criss-crossed the ridge and I knew that continuing to hunt here on this day was futile. That evening I scoured my map, trying to decide where I’d go if I was an elk being hunted by man and canine. I settled on a long ridge about three miles from where I’d been hunting and set the alarm clock early.
Not long into the new day, it was clear I’d made a good choice. As I eased through fresh snow along the edge of a burn, and cow and a calf materialized in front of me, casually walking within fifty yards before entering the timber. The whole time they were unaware of my presence and I gained a boost of confidence that it was possible to sneak close enough to an elk to make a good shot. I began to think that I had crossed some intangible threshold that signified my ability—worth perhaps—of the keen responsibility and honor that killing an elk demands. I was deep in elk country, meeting Wapiti on their terms and turf, passing the tests of hearing, sight, and smell…tests honed through the ancient dance of predator and prey.
Nearing the end of the day, I began to drop off down a finger ridge that I figured would lead me to a creek, then camp, a hot meal, and stories of the day's events with my hunting partners. But I still snuck my way along through the snow, pausing to scan ahead of me, and down into the draw below.
“There’s an elk.”
The matter-of-fact thought entered my brain shortly after my eyes saw a patch of tawny hide bedded in a tangle of deadfall one hundred yards below. Raising my binoculars, I could see that it was a bull and my legs started to shake. Easing into the prone position behind the trunk of a burnt lodgepole, I found the bull in my riflescope and confirmed that he had the required four-inch long brow times. Trying to settle the bucking crosshairs, I took a couple deep breaths, forcing myself to focus my excitement. The crosshairs came to rest solidly behind the bull’s shoulder and the shot echoed through the valley.
Since then, I have continued to hunt and kill elk in country where elk and hunters (of the two and four-legged variety) still match wits, and I like being part of it. There are a lot of places where a person can hunt knowing that they are undisputedly at the top of the food chain—most of Montana and nearly all of America. But there are precious few places where that role is shared and up for grabs.
In a polarized issue, I’m neither a wolf lover nor hater. In country big enough to support wolves, I think that they deserve a place out there. I’ve been lucky enough to tromp around in a few of those places with rifle in hand and the land feels different. It is whole, and we are lucky that we can still feel that special sense of bigness, that this world is a heck of a lot more than ourselves. It is spiritual. But that doesn’t mean that wolves should be everywhere or expand unchecked. The reality is that we are not living in the natural world through which Lewis and Clark traversed. Much of the West has been “tamed,” it isn’t wild, and wolves don’t belong in a chopped up, fenced, cut-over, urbanized landscape. It is cliché, but wolves are a symbol of wilderness, and they deserve those wild lands in which to be wolves. Moreover, we as humans deserve that wild country to find ourselves, test our mettle, and get back to what it means to be self-sufficient, if only for a long weekend.
Wolves. They stir up the emotion of what has been and what we hope our world to be. Folks need to work together from the baseline where we live now, the habitat we have left, our needs as a society, the values of intact ecosystems, and find balance between man and wolf. In short, this is wildlife management; it isn’t perfect, but we are fortunate enough to have the North American Model of Wildlife Management, where wildlife belongs to all, and is managed through hunting to try and achieve that balance given the constraints of our ecosystems and society. As with all animals with populations healthy enough to be hunted, wolves should be managed under this model based on population objectives, management goals, and the carrying capacity of habitat and society.
Dry, soulless terms those are: population objectives, management goals, carrying capacity…but we are not living in a natural Utopia. We can coexist with wolves on the landscape, and have great elk hunting too. But we need to be cognizant of where wolves deserve to roam, protect our remaining backcountry areas, and “manage” wolves dependant on the constraining variables we have created on the landscapes of the West.
Corey Fisher lives and works in western Montana, where spends his free time casting flies to trout and hunting about anything in season. He can be contacted at fisherwild@hotmail.com.
Post by: wolfbait on February 09, 2010, 10:48:13 AM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 09, 2010, 11:15:34 AM
Which program would you like me to get with?
BTW- there is a wolf info meeting in Usk if anyone in NE washington would like to hear more info from a DFW bio. see below.
USK, Wash. – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist Dana Base will discuss wolf biology and management at a presentation Feb. 23 in Usk.
The class, titled “They’re Back! Wolves in Pend Oreille County,” is sponsored by WSU/Pend Oreille County Extension and the Kalispel Tribe Natural Resources Department. It runs from 6:30 to 8 p.m. at the Usk Community Hall, 2442 Black Road. Registration is $5, or participants can bring a nonperishable food bank donation.
To reserve a seat, participants should preregister by calling (509) 447-2401 or e-mailing cmack@wsu.edu.
Post by: wolfbait on February 09, 2010, 11:53:59 AM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 09, 2010, 12:01:26 PM
Post by: SkookumHntr on February 09, 2010, 12:16:51 PM
Post by: wolfbait on February 09, 2010, 12:19:52 PM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 09, 2010, 12:30:44 PM
The trapper that the WDFW used said he had never seen a wolf over 129lbs...so, who should I believe? The guy that can field score a horse, or the guy that traps and weighs wolves for a living?
Post by: NWBREW on February 09, 2010, 12:32:20 PM
wolfbait...thanks for posting that.
WAcoyotehunter...thanks for posting the info about the meeting in USK on Feb. 23. I believe that meeting would be very informative.
Post by: bearpaw on February 09, 2010, 12:43:49 PM
My son has hunted in the heart of Idaho's wolf country and been around their wolves a lot, he says the same thing, "they weigh 150#", I told him the recorded weights of what was killed were 118# or less and he said "BS". He thinks all the younger dumb ones are being shot. My point is that they do look that large to people who see them, whether some weigh that much or not is hard to say for sure, but people really believe they do weigh that much. No matter, 118 is still one hell of a canine. :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 03:39:19 PM
Post by: bearpaw on February 09, 2010, 03:43:58 PM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 09, 2010, 03:52:10 PM
140 lbs shouldn't be too hard to believe...heck there was a 317lb cougar killed by Wenatchee this year! Didn't you get the email? :chuckle:good point...i got that email about ten times!
Post by: wolfbait on February 10, 2010, 11:18:48 PM
Translated from the Russian Hunting and Game Management
November, 1978, Pages 24, 25
Although there has been much attention directed towards the "predator--prey" biocenosis (i.e., intertwined existence), there isn't yet a unified view of the role of the predator: some researchers are trying to prove the existence of a balance in this biocenosis and ascribe to the predator the leading role in determining the number of prey; others propose that the number of predators is relatively small and that they don't cause tangible harm to the numbers of "useful" animals as opposed to the "harmful" ones.
Many propose that the wolf limits the numbers of hooved animals (Naumov, 1933; Semyonov-Tyanshanskij, 1948, 1969; Druri, Terletskij, 1962; Markidin, 1968; Komarov, Lavrov, 1969; Kheruvimov, 1969 and others).
The existence of diametrically opposed viewpoints speaks to the complexity of the problem and its incomplete research.
Turning to the question of the role of wolves and other predators (fox, polar fox, wolverine, etc.) in the spreading of infectious diseases it should be stressed that here, too, there is incomplete research. However, there are in the literature many reports of a percentage of observed wolves being the carriers of infectious diseases (brucella, deer-fly fever, listerosis, anthrax, and others), reports which provide a strong basis to think tha the predator plays an important role in their spread. It is most likely that this highly mobile predator ranging over dozens of miles is able to spread these diseases over significant distances.
Within the last few years wolfpacks have formed, which in order to survive, have been drawn to carrion, especially to dead cattle pits where the carcasses of the dead cows have not been properly buried despite the clear directives of veterinary medicine. In such situations these wolf carrion-eaters prove to be extremely serious spreaders of infectious diseases.
The wolf has been blamed for instances of the extremely severe diseases of both domesticated animals and man -- rabies. Lupine rabies after a latent period manifests itself in extreme agitation and aggression. Within a very short time such a dangerously sick wolf can widely spread out of his area of activity. For example, there is a recorded episode of just such a spread of rabies among farm animals and people in Belarus in 1957 when a rabid wolf within just a day and a half roamed over a hundred miles, bit 25 people (19 seriously), some 50 farm animals, and who knows how many forest creatures (Lin, 1962). Similar happenings are not rare. Moreover, while recognizing the undoubtedly serious role of the wolf in the spread of the rabies virus to man, one must be cognizant of the incomplete research in the wolf's role in limiting the numbers of other carriers of this disease, namely, the fox. The most recent examples of epizootic rabies (i.e. rapidly spreading) in Europe have occurred after the wolf was long gone, in the western regions of Europe and then spreading to the east.
Research has been done both in Russia and abroad to try to explain the role of the wolf in the spread of invasive or helminithic (I.E. caused by worms) diseases. In the Soviet Union alone the wolf can be infected with more than 50 types of parasites. Among these are several dangerous ones which can be transmitted to farm animals and to people. Significant damage can be done to wild hooved animals by larval parasites such as echinococcia, cysticercocci, and coenuri, all of which can attack man also. According to data from the Lenningrad Oblast' during a serious flare-up of cysticercosis not one observed female moose give birth to two calves, whereas in the Murmansk Oblast' where the outbreak was three times less severe all the moose females had two calves. The same type of situation was noted by Kheruvimov in 1969 in the Tambov Oblast'. There are also reports of the deaths of female moose and female deer caused by echinococcossi and cysticecocci. Wolves in the wild, seriously infected with the adult stage of cysticercosos by a tapeworm of the taenia family, are the sources of this parasitic invasion. It has been noted that where there aren't any wolves, the number of cysticerosis infected wild hooved animals is much less (Peterson, 1955). According to our data those wolves seriously infected with tapeworms (the source of larval parasites in feral hooved animals and in man) are found where their main food supply is hooved animals. In the Nenets Autonomous Region (Nazarov, Belaev, 1975) all observed wolves were seriously infected with tapeworms and four out of five had widespread echinoccocci. In the Belovezhsk Forest from 1957 to 1962 all eight wolves who underwent autopsies were found to be infected with tapeworm types of parasites harmful to both animals and people.
Together with the sufficiently negative influence of the wolf on its biocenosis by means of its spreading of infectious diseases to both animals and people, there are also not so rare data pointing out the elimination by the wolf-predator of sickly prey. In all likelihood, such sickly prey are the source of the diseases for healthy animals who get infected through the actions of the wolf. Most likely, both sides have a point in this matter. However, up to now neither side has evaluated the problem from an economic point of view. Moreover, in the report on the wolf (Dr. Mech) the culling-out role of the wolf was strongly emphasized, whereas its negative influence on nature as a spreader of disease was not discussed.
What's been said here leads us to the conclusion that deeper research on the wolf's epizootic role in the ecosystem is necessary, research which is free from pre-conceived notions (common in the past) and based on modern methodology.
That there is a need for stringent regulation of the wolf population in the USSR there can be no doubt.
http://www.marbut.com/wolvesinrussia/WolfandDisease.html (http://www.marbut.com/wolvesinrussia/WolfandDisease.html)
Post by: Fed up with deception on February 10, 2010, 11:55:48 PM
Males, on average, weigh 130 lbs Funny that the LARGEST wolf harvested in MT was 117 lbs...what gives?
Ten to twenty years down the road, hydatid disease will raise its head, in particular in persons who as toddlers crawled over floors walked over by people and dogs carrying in hydatid eggs from the outside. It's been ~15 years since introduction...where is this horrible pandemic worm?
I've heard a lot of people compare wolves to those nice little neighborhood puppy dogs. The number of people who have been attacked by wolves is growing. The number who have been killed is also growing. In his letter to Bangs, Graves pointed out that people in certain parts of Siberia do not venture outside at night because, if they do, their odds of being attacked by a wolf are substantial. Here is part of an e-mail from a Washingtonian, It's true that wolves in Siberia attack people...had they introduced wolves from Siberia I would be nervous. How many attacks have these introduced wolves been responsible for in the US?
"I can tell you I have had firsthand experience with these wolves in Washington, we have had them looking in our house windows, they have killed deer within a 100 yards of our house, I have shot at them to scare them off and they turn and lope right at me going past me at 50 yards. These wolves are not afraid of people and they are huge. We don't go out at night to let the dogs pee without taking a big flashlight and gun, I spend many nights at the barns watching out for our stock when the wolves are in close to us. One of the reasons that the wolf diseases will spread and be easy to come in contact with will be that there is too high of a population of wolves." Pictures please...I think I've heard this "tame as a housecat" discussion before but somehow there are never pictures to show these wolves so close to the house...what gives? If they're so close and tame take a picture.
If a Canadian Gray Wolf can crush the rib bones of a deer, just how safe do you truly believe you are if you come face to face with this predator without the means to defend yourself? If three wolves are not afraid to take on the majestic Grizzly, do you think they are afraid to take you on? Wait a minute...I thought they were in your yard with mundane regularity- how have you survived so long against those odds? :rolleyes:
Saveelk is BS propaganda and is about as accurate with facts as the PETA website. :twocents: I'm not really pro wolf, but I appreciate factual information to make an informed desision. I also see them as another big game animal, not a bloodthirsty killer. They do what predators do... I think you need to change your handle to something less like a hunter of coyotes and more like a paid up in full member of PETA because you sound a lot more like an animal rights guy than a hunter.
If you were really a hunter you would not be ragging on things that you are not 100% sure of such as bickering about a few pounds of weights of wolves. Maybe you should do a little homework before your so quick to condemn things that are said against this non native predator introduced by Wolf advocates who conveniently left out all the diseases and parasites wolves carry when they wrote up the EIS. There is a documented weight of this subspecies the Mackenzie valley wolf that weighed 175 pounds. That is documented. It was taken in Alaska. And you must think wolves from Siberia speak Russian and Wolves from Canada speak english or French I presume because you sure seem to think siberian wolves act differently than North American wolves. What is your basis for that?? You are obviously one of those raised on Walt Disney and can't see past what the enviro-nazi animal rights people have been shoving inside your head. I'm guessing you live dead center of some big liberal city because you sure act like someone who got their knowledge from inside the concrete jungle.
I believe wolfbait in his claims of a lot of wolves having no fear of humans. I went to high school with a girl who has had wolves pop up in front of her at under 30 yards and howl, and not run away. She has had them parallel her at 30 or 40 yards while on her horse, all the while pacing her and showing no fear. Can't say the same for her horse though. They routinely case her property looking for an easy victim in one of her pet dogs. They come and crap all over her porch and property marking her house as their territory. Does that sound like a cowering afraid animal?
I have scoured save our elks site and comparing them to PETA in terms of fact checking really tells me you are a wolf in sheeps clothing, er, I mean an anti in hunting clothing. Your transparency seems pretty clear to me. Any true hunter would not condemm so easily and callously.
What pray tell is on save our elk that you think is total B.S. ?? I am really curious to know becasue I have looked the site over well and I don't think they are trying to deceive anyone with lies. Maybe it's all the videos, I assume you think they are all fake?
There is one in there pertaining to your comment about wolves not being able to crush bones with their jaws. I will bet that is true although I have not done research on that but you can bet I will. Check out the video where the pack of wolves catch a slightly to long in lingering coyote at full stride. Considering that they literally rip the poor thing in half in about 2 seconds that kind of tells me they have pretty good jaws on them and a little bit of strength.
And last but not least, you, if indeed you really do coyote hunt, maybe you had better start reading up on E. Granulosus and E. Multilocularis,, (the little tape worm.) Bear in mind to be sure to believe everything the state biologists and Head wolf guy Ed Bang says about them. "they are no big deal," then you can go about your merry little way when your in the woods and not worry one bit about this happy go lucky little worm that won't hurt you in the least. Or maybe you will look at the research from those who do not fly by a political agenda and you will see what this beautiful little cestode is capable of. You might even find out that it can take any where from 2 to 15 years to manifest itself inside your body. That could be one reason why were not seeing a lot of people with it yet.
How would you like a grapefruit sized cyst (ball of tapeworms) on one of your lungs or on your liver from E. Granulosus. Theres another one though not readily found yet in our wolves, it might just be a matter of time for E. multilocularis to be transferred from more northern voles and fox.
This is a real nice worm. If you get this and are not diagnosed within 5 years 70% of those infected will die.
So all your talk about things that don't happen or have never happened is a naieve way of thinking considering how short a period of time the wolf has been down here.
As you see the numbers soar you will see these problems manifest themselves. And yes, it's just a matter of time before someone is ripped to shreds and eaten or "sport killed," another thing wolves love to do but I suppose you think that is all propaganda also.
I really feel sorry that real hunters have to put up with people like you who portray themselves as hunters or sportsmen. People like you with that kind of an attitude do hunters a great disservice by cow towing to the ideals of the anti's, the misinformed, and their lies and half truths.
It's sad to see you have bought into the disney version of the wolf so deeply. There are many reasons this country and most every other country that has had wolves in the past got rid of them. Those who pay no attention to history are doomed to repeat it. You definitly seem to have drunk the koolaid. If you really do hunt I feel sorry for you and your biased way of thinking. Together we stand, divided we fall..[/color]
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 11, 2010, 08:15:57 AM
Post by: Thenewguy on February 11, 2010, 08:34:28 AM
A well written artical
http://www.westernwolves.org/index.php/hunting-in-wolf-country (http://www.westernwolves.org/index.php/hunting-in-wolf-country)
Wild Lands, Wolves and Wapiti
by Corey Fisher, Montana Hunter
I didn’t grow up around wolves, or elk. I was raised in rural southern Michigan where the biggest wild canines were coyotes and the whitetail deer—while corn fed and fat—were nothing compared to elk. It was farm country and the big patches of timber were only 40 acres. A desire for open spaces and big country took me to college in northern Wisconsin, where the Chequamegon National Forest served as my introduction to our precious public lands heritage and also my first encounter with wolves.
While deer hunting the fall of my freshman year, I was watching the sunset and waited for a buck to come out of a cedar swamp when a sound from a couple ridges away sent shivers up my spine. These were not coyotes yapping as I was used to, but honest-to-God wolves howling through the cold November air. Walking out of the woods to my truck, I realized that I wasn’t alone at the top of the food chain in the Northwoods. I knew that there were a couple of packs in the region, but the actual confirmation that we were hunting in the same territory was thrilling. I’d come looking for big, wild country and I’d found it. Knowing that these animals were still here made me look at my new hunting area in a different way. This was a place that was whole—where the workings of nature still ticked. The fact that I, too, was part of it all was uplifting.
Later, I found myself lucky enough to be living and working in western Montana. Ever since my youth, spent chasing whitetails in woodlots, I’d wanted to hunt elk. The mystique of the backcountry and stories of wapiti that roamed the mountains beckoned me.
Searching the ample public lands in my new home, I focused on the Pintler and Sapphire Ranges as the place where I would hunt elk and fulfill a lifelong desire. I’d heard about the wolves in the region, and how they affected elk movement, but there seemed to be plenty of elk around so I hunted them…and hunted and hunted and hunted. Sure, I found elk, mostly flashes of tan crashing through dense stands of lodgepole as I spooked yet another herd. As the season wore down, I realized that hiking for miles on end wasn’t going to cut it: I had to slow down and work to get in close if I was going to kill an elk.
After making a personal pact to stop chasing elk as if it were some cross-country marathon, and actually start hunting, I found myself slowly stalking down a ridge on a snowy afternoon in late November. Elk sign was everywhere: droppings, tracks, beds. But the snow showed their age and I was there a day late; another hundred yards and the reason was clear. Several sets of wolf tracks criss-crossed the ridge and I knew that continuing to hunt here on this day was futile. That evening I scoured my map, trying to decide where I’d go if I was an elk being hunted by man and canine. I settled on a long ridge about three miles from where I’d been hunting and set the alarm clock early.
Not long into the new day, it was clear I’d made a good choice. As I eased through fresh snow along the edge of a burn, and cow and a calf materialized in front of me, casually walking within fifty yards before entering the timber. The whole time they were unaware of my presence and I gained a boost of confidence that it was possible to sneak close enough to an elk to make a good shot. I began to think that I had crossed some intangible threshold that signified my ability—worth perhaps—of the keen responsibility and honor that killing an elk demands. I was deep in elk country, meeting Wapiti on their terms and turf, passing the tests of hearing, sight, and smell…tests honed through the ancient dance of predator and prey.
Nearing the end of the day, I began to drop off down a finger ridge that I figured would lead me to a creek, then camp, a hot meal, and stories of the day's events with my hunting partners. But I still snuck my way along through the snow, pausing to scan ahead of me, and down into the draw below.
“There’s an elk.”
The matter-of-fact thought entered my brain shortly after my eyes saw a patch of tawny hide bedded in a tangle of deadfall one hundred yards below. Raising my binoculars, I could see that it was a bull and my legs started to shake. Easing into the prone position behind the trunk of a burnt lodgepole, I found the bull in my riflescope and confirmed that he had the required four-inch long brow times. Trying to settle the bucking crosshairs, I took a couple deep breaths, forcing myself to focus my excitement. The crosshairs came to rest solidly behind the bull’s shoulder and the shot echoed through the valley.
Since then, I have continued to hunt and kill elk in country where elk and hunters (of the two and four-legged variety) still match wits, and I like being part of it. There are a lot of places where a person can hunt knowing that they are undisputedly at the top of the food chain—most of Montana and nearly all of America. But there are precious few places where that role is shared and up for grabs.
In a polarized issue, I’m neither a wolf lover nor hater. In country big enough to support wolves, I think that they deserve a place out there. I’ve been lucky enough to tromp around in a few of those places with rifle in hand and the land feels different. It is whole, and we are lucky that we can still feel that special sense of bigness, that this world is a heck of a lot more than ourselves. It is spiritual. But that doesn’t mean that wolves should be everywhere or expand unchecked. The reality is that we are not living in the natural world through which Lewis and Clark traversed. Much of the West has been “tamed,” it isn’t wild, and wolves don’t belong in a chopped up, fenced, cut-over, urbanized landscape. It is cliché, but wolves are a symbol of wilderness, and they deserve those wild lands in which to be wolves. Moreover, we as humans deserve that wild country to find ourselves, test our mettle, and get back to what it means to be self-sufficient, if only for a long weekend.
Wolves. They stir up the emotion of what has been and what we hope our world to be. Folks need to work together from the baseline where we live now, the habitat we have left, our needs as a society, the values of intact ecosystems, and find balance between man and wolf. In short, this is wildlife management; it isn’t perfect, but we are fortunate enough to have the North American Model of Wildlife Management, where wildlife belongs to all, and is managed through hunting to try and achieve that balance given the constraints of our ecosystems and society. As with all animals with populations healthy enough to be hunted, wolves should be managed under this model based on population objectives, management goals, and the carrying capacity of habitat and society.
Dry, soulless terms those are: population objectives, management goals, carrying capacity…but we are not living in a natural Utopia. We can coexist with wolves on the landscape, and have great elk hunting too. But we need to be cognizant of where wolves deserve to roam, protect our remaining backcountry areas, and “manage” wolves dependant on the constraining variables we have created on the landscapes of the West.
Corey Fisher lives and works in western Montana, where spends his free time casting flies to trout and hunting about anything in season. He can be contacted at fisherwild@hotmail.com.
umm, what was this article supposed to be saying? I saw not facts at all
Post by: SkookumHntr on February 11, 2010, 08:50:31 AM
-Sounds like a good first post to me! I Hunted Northern British Columbia last year and seen what wolves do first hand, Ruin great hunting! Wolf tracs trailing every set of Moose tracs I found, The Male wolf I killed weighed 160 scaled pounds. I seen pics of wolves way bigger then mine. Now, On my Mule Deer hunt this fall in the pasayton, areas that I see 10+deer aday in more often then not, didnt see a single deer in 4 days, Wolves howling around my camp and found 2 young does all tore up in to pieces >:( Sounds like that Wacoyotehtr clown fell of the PETA wagon to me. Just Sayin... :dunno:
Males, on average, weigh 130 lbs Funny that the LARGEST wolf harvested in MT was 117 lbs...what gives?
Ten to twenty years down the road, hydatid disease will raise its head, in particular in persons who as toddlers crawled over floors walked over by people and dogs carrying in hydatid eggs from the outside. It's been ~15 years since introduction...where is this horrible pandemic worm?
I've heard a lot of people compare wolves to those nice little neighborhood puppy dogs. The number of people who have been attacked by wolves is growing. The number who have been killed is also growing. In his letter to Bangs, Graves pointed out that people in certain parts of Siberia do not venture outside at night because, if they do, their odds of being attacked by a wolf are substantial. Here is part of an e-mail from a Washingtonian, It's true that wolves in Siberia attack people...had they introduced wolves from Siberia I would be nervous. How many attacks have these introduced wolves been responsible for in the US?
"I can tell you I have had firsthand experience with these wolves in Washington, we have had them looking in our house windows, they have killed deer within a 100 yards of our house, I have shot at them to scare them off and they turn and lope right at me going past me at 50 yards. These wolves are not afraid of people and they are huge. We don't go out at night to let the dogs pee without taking a big flashlight and gun, I spend many nights at the barns watching out for our stock when the wolves are in close to us. One of the reasons that the wolf diseases will spread and be easy to come in contact with will be that there is too high of a population of wolves." Pictures please...I think I've heard this "tame as a housecat" discussion before but somehow there are never pictures to show these wolves so close to the house...what gives? If they're so close and tame take a picture.
If a Canadian Gray Wolf can crush the rib bones of a deer, just how safe do you truly believe you are if you come face to face with this predator without the means to defend yourself? If three wolves are not afraid to take on the majestic Grizzly, do you think they are afraid to take you on? Wait a minute...I thought they were in your yard with mundane regularity- how have you survived so long against those odds? :rolleyes:
Saveelk is BS propaganda and is about as accurate with facts as the PETA website. :twocents: I'm not really pro wolf, but I appreciate factual information to make an informed desision. I also see them as another big game animal, not a bloodthirsty killer. They do what predators do... I think you need to change your handle to something less like a hunter of coyotes and more like a paid up in full member of PETA because you sound a lot more like an animal rights guy than a hunter.
If you were really a hunter you would not be ragging on things that you are not 100% sure of such as bickering about a few pounds of weights of wolves. Maybe you should do a little homework before your so quick to condemn things that are said against this non native predator introduced by Wolf advocates who conveniently left out all the diseases and parasites wolves carry when they wrote up the EIS. There is a documented weight of this subspecies the Mackenzie valley wolf that weighed 175 pounds. That is documented. It was taken in Alaska. And you must think wolves from Siberia speak Russian and Wolves from Canada speak english or French I presume because you sure seem to think siberian wolves act differently than North American wolves. What is your basis for that?? You are obviously one of those raised on Walt Disney and can't see past what the enviro-nazi animal rights people have been shoving inside your head. I'm guessing you live dead center of some big liberal city because you sure act like someone who got their knowledge from inside the concrete jungle.
I believe wolfbait in his claims of a lot of wolves having no fear of humans. I went to high school with a girl who has had wolves pop up in front of her at under 30 yards and howl, and not run away. She has had them parallel her at 30 or 40 yards while on her horse, all the while pacing her and showing no fear. Can't say the same for her horse though. They routinely case her property looking for an easy victim in one of her pet dogs. They come and crap all over her porch and property marking her house as their territory. Does that sound like a cowering afraid animal?
I have scoured save our elks site and comparing them to PETA in terms of fact checking really tells me you are a wolf in sheeps clothing, er, I mean an anti in hunting clothing. Your transparency seems pretty clear to me. Any true hunter would not condemm so easily and callously.
What pray tell is on save our elk that you think is total B.S. ?? I am really curious to know becasue I have looked the site over well and I don't think they are trying to deceive anyone with lies. Maybe it's all the videos, I assume you think they are all fake?
There is one in there pertaining to your comment about wolves not being able to crush bones with their jaws. I will bet that is true although I have not done research on that but you can bet I will. Check out the video where the pack of wolves catch a slightly to long in lingering coyote at full stride. Considering that they literally rip the poor thing in half in about 2 seconds that kind of tells me they have pretty good jaws on them and a little bit of strength.
And last but not least, you, if indeed you really do coyote hunt, maybe you had better start reading up on E. Granulosus and E. Multilocularis,, (the little tape worm.) Bear in mind to be sure to believe everything the state biologists and Head wolf guy Ed Bang says about them. "they are no big deal," then you can go about your merry little way when your in the woods and not worry one bit about this happy go lucky little worm that won't hurt you in the least. Or maybe you will look at the research from those who do not fly by a political agenda and you will see what this beautiful little cestode is capable of. You might even find out that it can take any where from 2 to 15 years to manifest itself inside your body. That could be one reason why were not seeing a lot of people with it yet.
How would you like a grapefruit sized cyst (ball of tapeworms) on one of your lungs or on your liver from E. Granulosus. Theres another one though not readily found yet in our wolves, it might just be a matter of time for E. multilocularis to be transferred from more northern voles and fox.
This is a real nice worm. If you get this and are not diagnosed within 5 years 70% of those infected will die.
So all your talk about things that don't happen or have never happened is a naieve way of thinking considering how short a period of time the wolf has been down here.
As you see the numbers soar you will see these problems manifest themselves. And yes, it's just a matter of time before someone is ripped to shreds and eaten or "sport killed," another thing wolves love to do but I suppose you think that is all propaganda also.
I really feel sorry that real hunters have to put up with people like you who portray themselves as hunters or sportsmen. People like you with that kind of an attitude do hunters a great disservice by cow towing to the ideals of the anti's, the misinformed, and their lies and half truths.
It's sad to see you have bought into the disney version of the wolf so deeply. There are many reasons this country and most every other country that has had wolves in the past got rid of them. Those who pay no attention to history are doomed to repeat it. You definitly seem to have drunk the koolaid. If you really do hunt I feel sorry for you and your biased way of thinking. Together we stand, divided we fall..[/color]
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 11, 2010, 09:22:23 AM
Really- my suggestion is to continue what you're doing and pay attention to wolf sign. Document it and report to the state to help the delisting effort. That is the only way that I can think of to get the delisting process going an begin managing wolves once they are well established. :twocents:
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2010, 09:45:46 AM
Sounds like a good first post to me! I Hunted Northern British Columbia last year and seen what wolves do first hand, Ruin great hunting! Wolf tracks trailing every set of Moose tracks I found, The Male wolf I killed weighed 160 scaled pounds. I seen pics of wolves way bigger then mine. Now, On my Mule Deer hunt this fall in the pasayton, areas that I see 10+deer a day in more often then not, didn't see a single deer in 4 days, Wolves howling around my camp and found 2 young does all tore up in to pieces Sounds like that Wacoyotehtr clown fell of the PETA wagon to me. Just Sayin...
So let me get this straight, just this year you noticed that the wolves have culled the herds down to low numbers? But yet the wolves according to some people have been around for 5 or more years. That seems a little odd that in one year the wolves suddenly decide to kill all the deer! Do you have pics of the "160 pound wolf" you shot? I would love to see it.
I am not going to get involved with the dispute two people have.....but the difference in weight of 130 pounds and 117 pounds is only 13 pounds. I do not believe that to be grossly over estimated. just my :twocents:
It is not very much in terms of numbers, but put it into another perspective that has as much emotion tied to it on this site. What is the difference between a 200" mule deer and a 187" mule deer? Some members here would argue to death over that 13" being a huge difference. It comes down to playing with people's emotions, 130# sounds big but 118# is a lot closer to what some people see with their own dogs. :twocents:
Brandon
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 11, 2010, 09:52:11 AM
It's also the difference in the AVERAGE size of 130lbs (which is BS) and an exceptional (the largest killed this year in MT) of 117 lbs. You're right- 13 lbs might not be a big deal, but if you consider the average it could have a standard error of "who knows how much"...
It is not very much in terms of numbers, but put it into another perspective that has as much emotion tied to it on this site. What is the difference between a 200" mule deer and a 187" mule deer? Some members here would argue to death over that 13" being a huge difference. It comes down to playing with people's emotions, 130# sounds big but 118# is a lot closer to what some people see with their own dogs. :twocents:
Brandon
Post by: Sporting_Man on February 11, 2010, 10:03:27 AM
I know countries in Eastern europe where Russian boar and wolf are all what is left in the wilderness... No goats, deer, etc.
The idiotic wolf plan WILL affect the way of life here in the west, especially that tapeworm issue is bad. Problem is, in this country, nobody thinks of future, it is all about today and one-sided special groups and their twisted views... I think that sportsmen should push to de-politicize the issue as much as possible and take it to the reasonable masses. It should be documented and explained to everybody why wolves are BAD idea. Soccer moms should be just as worried about this as our activists like Wolfbait and others... We have to get to them. Hydatid Tapeworm is not a joke!
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2010, 10:08:55 AM
I tend to disagree with de-listing and treating wolves as game animals in the future... One pair of wolves produces 2-5 or 6 pups, while one pair of real game animals produces 1 or 2 (rarely) fawns, calves, or whatever. Since ungulates don't eat wolves, obviously, wolves win down the road. They are pests and should be treated as such. They will always exist, since they are highly adaptable, but we should keep them ALWAYS under control. Hunting season can not control their populations...
First of all hunting can controll their populations, it works that's why we have hunting seasons. Yes they do have 2-6 pups per year but do you know how many of those 6 survive to the age of 1? Look it up you may be amazed.
It's also the difference in the AVERAGE size of 130lbs (which is BS) and an exceptional (the largest killed this year in MT) of 117 lbs. You're right- 13 lbs might not be a big deal, but if you consider the average it could have a standard error of "who knows how much"...
I am not sure how many on here would understand standard error! I would like to know what the average size was as well!!
Brandon
Post by: Sporting_Man on February 11, 2010, 10:17:39 AM
Idaho hunters did not meet their quota as of yet, with all the rage and giddy-up about wolf hunting...
Elk is a disciplined easy target in comparison with wolf. Besides, who will want to hunt them when 60% of them are badly infested with dangerous tapeworms..?
I saw a wolf once in a wild, or oh, no, I maybe saw a wolf , or - was it just a shadow of a wolf gliding through the landscape... lasted about 4 seconds. That is how I can describe the experience... My dad and I had a rifle and could shoot him too, but no way we were ready to do anything in that window of opportunity that he gave us.
Post by: Shootmoore on February 11, 2010, 10:24:10 AM
I tend to disagree with de-listing and treating wolves as game animals in the future... One pair of wolves produces 2-5 or 6 pups, while one pair of real game animals produces 1 or 2 (rarely) fawns, calves, or whatever. Since ungulates don't eat wolves, obviously, wolves win down the road. They are pests and should be treated as such. They will always exist, since they are highly adaptable, but we should keep them ALWAYS under control. Hunting season can not control their populations...
First of all hunting can controll their populations, it works that's why we have hunting seasons. Yes they do have 2-6 pups per year but do you know how many of those 6 survive to the age of 1? Look it up you may be amazed.It's also the difference in the AVERAGE size of 130lbs (which is BS) and an exceptional (the largest killed this year in MT) of 117 lbs. You're right- 13 lbs might not be a big deal, but if you consider the average it could have a standard error of "who knows how much"...
I am not sure how many on here would understand standard error! I would like to know what the average size was as well!!
Brandon
Yes and no, Old Bangs reported that the hunting in Montana and Idaho had zero affect on the wolf populations in those two states including the state removal of problem wolfs. That the populations were at least the same if not increasing even with those two hunting seasons. IF they are allowed to hunt again this year and IF they try to increase the take numbers it will be a good year to study and see if they can decrease the population. I am guessing not. Also only 1 pup surviving is a statistic that was developed in Canada, it would appear that we are having a higher success rate here in the lower 48. It appears that there was close to a 100% survival rate this year of the Methow packs, or that there are more wolves that a single pack in the area. What I find strange is we went from 0 sightings to multiple sightings in just a couple years. The initial alpha pair must of called long distance and had some of there northern relatives move down.
Reference the weight issue, my guess is that many of the wolves taken were young wolves and very few were alpha or older larger wolves. As in most hunting situations the young and dumb ones are the ones that get shot first. I would also like to see what the overall average was. It would give a good idea of what at least some of the wolf sizes are. I would guess that it would be in the 100+ range and not lower towards the 75 pound range as some claim that the wolves down here are.
I also just did some research and it is claimed that the Mackenzie Valley wolf was the ones used in the transplantation in Yellowstone. Average male weight for this subspecies is 100 to 145 pounds. With the world record trapped in 1939 at 175 pounds. It will be interesting to see how a subspecies that developed in the far north will do in a milder southern climate. From researching the topic it appears that our original timber wolves that we had in the lower 48 averaged from 40 to 90 pounds. It appears we have transplanted a much larger subspecies into the lower 48. I took this info from "pro-wolf" sights in the interest of fairness.
Shootmoore
Post by: NWBREW on February 11, 2010, 10:51:00 AM
Really- my suggestion is to continue what you're doing and pay attention to wolf sign. Document it and report to the state to help the delisting effort. That is the only way that I can think of to get the delisting process going an begin managing wolves once they are well established. :twocents:
I agree. For the most part I believe most are trying to do that. Some may take it to a farther extreme then others and may have good reason. I do not live where the wolves roam......yet, but I do own property where they do. I also do not have livestock on that property but do hunt deer and elk there. Yes I have a vested interest in seeing the wolf reach hunt statis. We can argue amongst ourselfs all we want but that will not help the interest of big game hunters and land owners with livestock in washington state....or any state. The only way to manage a wolf problem is to delist and hunt them. For that we need to work together.
And as for the difference between 117 and 130 pounds....I have not seen a 130 pound wolf taken but if you think that 117 pound wolf was the biggest wolf out there .....your fooling yourself. I don't believe for a second that 130 pounds is the average but I do believe they exist in Wash. or Idaho. Not trying to start an argument just my opinion. :)
Post by: SkookumHntr on February 11, 2010, 10:56:06 AM
-We seen are first wolf in the upper Sinlahekin about 5 years ago! We didnt hunt 08 becouse of other hunts but 09 yes from 07 to 09 the deer numbers are wayway down! I dont care what any Bio's say, Hunting was as *censored*ty as I have ever seen and we had a better later season with weather towards the end. The deer in the area we hunt were more herded up and not spread out like normal and pretty odvious things are different then 3+ years ago, This coming up fall will tell us more, if hunting is *censored*ty again no doubt the wolves have ran um out or changed the normal patterns of the deer herd. And Yes I got pics of my wolf, If I can figure out how to scan a regular pic and get it on here I will, but keep in mind its a canadian timber wolf and there pretty big, Its on the brochere for Double Eagle Outfitters in BC if you happen to go to the Portland Sportsmans show.Sounds like a good first post to me! I Hunted Northern British Columbia last year and seen what wolves do first hand, Ruin great hunting! Wolf tracks trailing every set of Moose tracks I found, The Male wolf I killed weighed 160 scaled pounds. I seen pics of wolves way bigger then mine. Now, On my Mule Deer hunt this fall in the pasayton, areas that I see 10+deer a day in more often then not, didn't see a single deer in 4 days, Wolves howling around my camp and found 2 young does all tore up in to pieces Sounds like that Wacoyotehtr clown fell of the PETA wagon to me. Just Sayin...
So let me get this straight, just this year you noticed that the wolves have culled the herds down to low numbers? But yet the wolves according to some people have been around for 5 or more years. That seems a little odd that in one year the wolves suddenly decide to kill all the deer! Do you have pics of the "160 pound wolf" you shot? I would love to see it.I am not going to get involved with the dispute two people have.....but the difference in weight of 130 pounds and 117 pounds is only 13 pounds. I do not believe that to be grossly over estimated. just my :twocents:
It is not very much in terms of numbers, but put it into another perspective that has as much emotion tied to it on this site. What is the difference between a 200" mule deer and a 187" mule deer? Some members here would argue to death over that 13" being a huge difference. It comes down to playing with people's emotions, 130# sounds big but 118# is a lot closer to what some people see with their own dogs. :twocents:
Brandon
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2010, 12:16:13 PM
We seen are first wolf in the upper Sinlahekin about 5 years ago! We didn't hunt 08 because of other hunts but 09 yes from 07 to 09 the deer numbers are wayway down! I don't care what any Bio's say, Hunting was as *censored*ty as I have ever seen and we had a better later season with weather towards the end. The deer in the area we hunt were more herded up and not spread out like normal and pretty obvious things are different then 3+ years ago, This coming up fall will tell us more, if hunting is *censored*ty again no doubt the wolves have ran um out or changed the normal patterns of the deer herd. And Yes I got pics of my wolf, If I can figure out how to scan a regular pic and get it on here I will, but keep in mind its a Canadian timber wolf and there pretty big, Its on the brochure for Double Eagle Outfitters in BC if you happen to go to the Portland Sportsmans show.
So that right there, if I understand what you are saying, states that the hunting was better with weather, and the deer were herded up. So plain and simple the numbers are normal they have just altered their movement patterns, and their useage areas.
Brandon, how many deer fawns and elk calves will survive to the age of 1 in the wolf country?The latest study I read in Idaho or Montana, I will have to find the article again for reference, said the elk calf survival rate for 2008 was ~30% or perfectly in line with the ten year average. So there has been an equilibrium established between the wolves presence and elk numbers. That means as long as we as hunters aren't allowed to overharvest the numbers will start to climb again.
Brandon
Post by: Fed up with deception on February 11, 2010, 12:19:03 PM
You're right- we're all screwed. If the wolves don't eat us and all the game, we're all going to die from parasitic worms. If i was you guys, I would stay out of the woods; it's just too dangerous there. :rolleyes:
Really- my suggestion is to continue what you're doing and pay attention to wolf sign. Document it and report to the state to help the delisting effort. That is the only way that I can think of to get the delisting process going an begin managing wolves once they are well established. :twocents: You just don't get it do you, delisting to what? delisting to big game species is absolutely the wrong approach. If they are not considered as a predator, you will have the same bureaucratic problems that Idaho is having. Come on, I suppose you think that the 220 some tags they gave out was a grand and noble gesture, well you got that partially right, it was a gesture. 2 or 3 times that many pups will be born this year. The scientists, yes scientists say in order to keep a wolf population in check, 70% mortality has to occur every single year. The way game departments are run these days, they are most definitely being run by anti hunters. All the biologists sure are. If you don't see that then you are either not the brightest firefly in the woods, or very sadly trusting, or quite possibly, on the other side, It's time to wake up and see that the WDFW is not on the hunters side. They have been sliding left for decades now. These disease, parasite ridden sport killers need to be eliminated. Unfortunately with "hunters" like you on our side that is not going to happen. When all you have left to hunt WA. is your coyote, I hope you will be happy, for left to the federalise and our ill game dept. it will only be a short amount of time before we are in the same predicament as Idaho and Montana etc, etc. Either stand with us or quit your ill anti hunting propaganda on a hunting web site. You do nothing other than to further the anti hunter sentiment that is rampant across the nation.
Post by: SkookumHntr on February 11, 2010, 12:49:57 PM
-No you missunderstood, we had a later season, Oct 17-25, snow and wind on the 24-25, should have been outstanding hunting, nope, awful, we seen one group of deer with about 18 deer. In the area we hunt you never see them grouped up like that! Believe me bud, we are not the only group that noticed the drop in deer numbers, Im not going to take this argument any further becouse you dont know much about the upper Okanogan Deer herds, but the guys that do know, know there in trouble!We seen are first wolf in the upper Sinlahekin about 5 years ago! We didn't hunt 08 because of other hunts but 09 yes from 07 to 09 the deer numbers are wayway down! I don't care what any Bio's say, Hunting was as *censored*ty as I have ever seen and we had a better later season with weather towards the end. The deer in the area we hunt were more herded up and not spread out like normal and pretty obvious things are different then 3+ years ago, This coming up fall will tell us more, if hunting is *censored*ty again no doubt the wolves have ran um out or changed the normal patterns of the deer herd. And Yes I got pics of my wolf, If I can figure out how to scan a regular pic and get it on here I will, but keep in mind its a Canadian timber wolf and there pretty big, Its on the brochure for Double Eagle Outfitters in BC if you happen to go to the Portland Sportsmans show.
So that right there, if I understand what you are saying, states that the hunting was better with weather, and the deer were herded up. So plain and simple the numbers are normal they have just altered their movement patterns, and their useage areas.Brandon, how many deer fawns and elk calves will survive to the age of 1 in the wolf country?The latest study I read in Idaho or Montana, I will have to find the article again for reference, said the elk calf survival rate for 2008 was ~30% or perfectly in line with the ten year average. So there has been an equilibrium established between the wolves presence and elk numbers. That means as long as we as hunters aren't allowed to overharvest the numbers will start to climb again.
Brandon
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2010, 01:20:54 PM
Brandon
Post by: SkookumHntr on February 11, 2010, 04:06:38 PM
Post by: spikehunter on February 11, 2010, 04:30:16 PM
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2010, 05:09:53 PM
Brandon
Post by: wolfbait on February 11, 2010, 05:26:23 PM
Brandon the more you talk the less sense you make, give up before you drop in over your head. WDFW biologist have lied to the public on livestock kills, they have lied on the wolf count, they have lied through the whole Washington wolf issue, but then they are defenders of wildlife so what should we expect. Your book learning does not carry over to what is seen in the woods, it would be great if you could sit in your warm cozy office and tell everyone exactly what the deer count is like s.fitkin is doing, but that is not the way it works. You need to get out in the brush sonny.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on February 11, 2010, 05:35:31 PM
The truth is WDFW and Defenders of Wildlife among others have been planting wolves in Washington for along time, it takes awhile for the wolves to run out of prey and to drop down into lower elevations where they have not yet started killing. This I know for a fact. The wolves that were planted this spring, was the very same week that WDFW bought the new "deer Habitat" with wolf money. Not surprising s.fitkin was so happy he went to the Wenatchee world and bragged about the 8 wolves that were now fattening up on the "new deer habitat that WDFW had just purchased. New information has surfaced of wolves being planted, and if I was Harriet Allen I would definitely start looking for other employment. If I was a WDFW I would think about pulling head out of ass and try to figure out a way to sidestep the avalanche that is head their way. As I have said before Washington is not just now starting wolf recovery, but in fact should never have been put on the endangered list, but instead been classified as a predator and shot on sight. Wolves were not meant to be down in the low lands running through peoples yards, they are suppose to be up in the wilderness.
Brandon the more you talk the less sense you make, give up before you drop in over your head. WDFW biologist have lied to the public on livestock kills, they have lied on the wolf count, they have lied through the whole Washington wolf issue, but then they are defenders of wildlife so what should we expect. Your book learning does not carry over to what is seen in the woods, it would be great if you could sit in your warm cozy office and tell everyone exactly what the deer count is like s.fitkin is doing, but that is not the way it works. You need to get out in the brush sonny.
Looking forward to your evidence of the planting. As you know- I'm suspect of any translocation or relocation theories, but if you have proof and can bring it forward I would love to see that.
Post by: SkookumHntr on February 11, 2010, 05:42:25 PM
Post by: wolfbait on February 11, 2010, 05:56:46 PM
Post by: Kain on February 11, 2010, 08:18:18 PM
This is the title of the pic.
Quote
22 Wolves = 10,000 missing elk in the Lolo valley in Idaho. Not to mention the rest of the state.(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash1%2Fhs254.ash1%2F18158_298642146777_77503431777_3522208_7366329_n.jpg&hash=5b84f2596c3b67b6b72ec60c78e6d845f954d7d1)
Post by: mulehunter on February 11, 2010, 10:09:28 PM
I cant believe NO ONE shot them this year! STILL 7 :bash:
Mulehunter :o
Post by: wolfbait on February 11, 2010, 10:18:22 PM
Post by: Lowedog on February 11, 2010, 11:05:28 PM
Post by: mulehunter on February 11, 2010, 11:08:58 PM
Have you seen the GPS wolves lately? you know the packs that no one is suppose to know about. Talk about the dumb leading the dumb, Wdfandwolves
:chuckle: Were you talking about RED Collar or Black Collar? :dunno:
Mulehunter ;)
Post by: luvtohnt on February 12, 2010, 07:05:01 AM
WDFW are not going to be smelling like a rose when everything comes out and all is said and done I can tell you that right now. Funny thing about the truth, when it stinks to high heaven and the blind can see the lies then something is sure to give. WDFW went out of their way to make an example of the White's, which really opened up the wolf issue in Washington, you might say WDFW sh$t in their own nest. Now their fat is in the fire and I'm betting there is a lot of finger pointing going on inside WDFW headquarters. ;)
So when the DNR and WDFW merge maybe all the wolf employees will be the ones that are let go!!
Brandon
Post by: bearpaw on February 12, 2010, 11:33:03 AM
WDFW are not going to be smelling like a rose when everything comes out and all is said and done I can tell you that right now. Funny thing about the truth, when it stinks to high heaven and the blind can see the lies then something is sure to give. WDFW went out of their way to make an example of the White's, which really opened up the wolf issue in Washington, you might say WDFW sh$t in their own nest. Now their fat is in the fire and I'm betting there is a lot of finger pointing going on inside WDFW headquarters. ;)
So when the DNR and WDFW merge maybe all the wolf employees will be the ones that are let go!!
Brandon
We will never be that lucky, it will probably be the other way around.... :bash:
Post by: wolfbait on February 12, 2010, 11:54:03 AM
I was in John Day, Or. 2 weeks ago, up Canyon Ck. Rd.(the 15 Road) and stopped to talk to one of the guys who grooms the snowmobile trails. Naturally the topic of hunting came into the conversation which then lead to my opinion of the wolf population creeping into the N.E. portion of Oregon. He said the population was getting some help from the ODFW as he had witnessed a few weeks earlier 2 collared wolves being released close to where we were standing(within a mile). This is on the S.E. side of the Strawberry Mt. Wilderness Area. I was horrified and asked him how they could do this and where the approval came from. His answer was that they apparantly didn't need any approval and they just do what they want as secretively as they want. Needless to say this guy was fit to be tied as a hunter and outdoorsman in one of the best big game hunting areas in the state. Weather his information was true, I cannot be certain, but if so, it would be a trajedy for that region. I hope someone has the means to verify this and will reply as to its validity.
http://www.biggamehoundsmen.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12693 (http://www.biggamehoundsmen.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12693)
Post by: bearpaw on February 12, 2010, 12:04:03 PM
Western States Sportsman just posted this pic on their Facebook page. I had not seen it before and thought I would share. I didnt want to start a whole new thread and figured anyone that is into the wolf issue is probably on this thread.
This is the title of the pic.Quote22 Wolves = 10,000 missing elk in the Lolo valley in Idaho. Not to mention the rest of the state.(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash1%2Fhs254.ash1%2F18158_298642146777_77503431777_3522208_7366329_n.jpg&hash=5b84f2596c3b67b6b72ec60c78e6d845f954d7d1)
There will be more photos like that cropping up as time goes by. Wonder how many deer/elk per year that group requires? I think it figures out to roughly 1,000 deer or 300 elk according to government studies.
Post by: Kain on February 12, 2010, 06:53:21 PM
Post by: SuperX on February 13, 2010, 11:41:02 PM