Gray Wolves Become Victims Again

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:48 am

April 5, 2008

Editorial

When Protection Vanishes

At midnight on March 28, the gray wolves in Wyoming slipped out of the protection of the Endangered Species Act and became other kinds of creatures: trophy game animals to be hunted in the state’s northwest corner and predators to be shot on sight elsewhere.

The nature of the wolf didn’t change, only the restraints imposed on humans. In the next three days, three wolves were killed, two by hunters and one by a rancher, all in the predator zone where the only restriction is the obligation to report a kill within 10 days. Environmental groups plan to sue to reverse the lifting of these protections, but they are barred from doing so for 30 days — plenty of time for more wolves to die.

It is tempting to adduce an ancestral hostility between man and wolf. But this is a problem in economics. Wolves kill a small number of livestock, and compensating ranchers’ losses is a price worth paying. What this is really about is a competition between two top predators — man and wolf — for elk. Elk-hunting generates revenue, and wolves cannot pay for the elk they take.

Gray wolves in the Rocky Mountains were eradicated in the early 20th century, so it is easy to think of them as a special case. They were reintroduced by humans — a legally mandated intervention — and they will be killed by humans because of another legal intervention. Their survival is wholly a matter of our intent. And yet you might say the same thing about every other species, every other ecosystem on this planet.

The more we think about it, the more we believe the only nature that matters anymore is human nature. This is not a happy thought. The answer to every important environmental question ultimately depends on human self-restraint. The simple ethical fact seems to be that humans cannot restrain themselves, not without laws and incentives that are only as solid as our weakest intentions. The laws change, and overnight all that good work is threatened by gun smoke.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:49 am

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:35 am

More animal worship. I have a rancher cousin who is struggling to build up his herd. He just now thinned out the coyotes who were luring the wife's pet dogs out to be killed, and killing her chickens and turkeys. Last summer cougars attacked and killed one horse and severly injured another. The cougars had to be hunted down since they were showing up in more populated areas. Now wolves are moving in.

The earth has been losing species ever since day one. There is still an abundance of wildlife. We should stop tampering with things.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:42 am

hoppy;827438 wrote: More animal worship. I have a rancher cousin who is struggling to build up his herd. He just now thinned out the coyotes who were luring the wife's pet dogs out to be killed, and killing her chickens and turkeys. Last summer cougars attacked and killed one horse and severly injured another. The cougars had to be hunted down since they were showing up in more populated areas. Now wolves are moving in.

The earth has been losing species ever since day one. There is still an abundance of wildlife. We should stop tampering with things.How the ruddy hell is shooting them not "tampering with things"??

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:16 am

Excuse me the land the Coyotes and Wolves roam use to be all their's. What the problems is we don't know how to co-exist with animals that have every right to roam and hunt the land as they do, they have to eat just like us. :-5 Unlike like us animals only hunt and kill to eat. Sad that we blame them not ourselves.

[QUOTE]More animal worship. I have a rancher cousin who is struggling to build up his herd. He just now thinned out the coyotes who were luring the wife's pet dogs out to be killed, and killing her chickens and turkeys. Last summer cougars attacked and killed one horse and severly injured another. The cougars had to be hunted down since they were showing up in more populated areas. Now wolves are moving in.

The earth has been losing species ever since day one. There is still an abundance of wildlife. We should stop tampering with things.[/QUOTE]

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:46 pm

We re-introduced them to areas that will not support large numbers of wolves, then we forbid hunting and trapping them. Naturally, they will outgrow their range. wolves roam over many miles of real estate. As the packs multiply, so does their range. If you don't have unlimited land available, common sense says don't introduce them in that area. THAT is what I mean by tampering.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:28 pm

I agree with this, still ashame that they have to suffer because we can't figure this out so now we have to kill them again to thin the packs. :-5:-5

[QUOTE]If you don't have unlimited land available, common sense says don't introduce them in that area. THAT is what I mean by tampering.[/QUOTE]

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:44 pm

hoppy;827734 wrote: We re-introduced them to areas that will not support large numbers of wolves, then we forbid hunting and trapping them. Naturally, they will outgrow their range. wolves roam over many miles of real estate. As the packs multiply, so does their range. If you don't have unlimited land available, common sense says don't introduce them in that area. THAT is what I mean by tampering.

I seem to recall that we had this discussion not too long back and it turned out that the amount of livestock taken by wolves was minuscule - and that any wolf that starts to predate on livestock is culled.

The fact that coyote (by far the biggest killer of livestock) and cougar are hitting your cousins livestock does not suggest that wolfs should be denied their natural territory.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:58 pm

Wolf packs are capable of taking down large game animals. The fact that few domestic livestock is lost to wolves is because they haven't multiplied into large packs in more populated areas yet. Just wait until they use up their usual prey. Didn't they have wolves in parts of Great Britian once? By all means re-introduce them to your country.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:21 pm

hoppy;827773 wrote: Wolf packs are capable of taking down large game animals. The fact that few domestic livestock is lost to wolves is because they haven't multiplied into large packs in more populated areas yet. Just wait until they use up their usual prey. Didn't they have wolves in parts of Great Britian once? By all means re-introduce them to your country.

No-one doubts that wolves are capable of taking large prey - the fact is that they don't take livestock and every precaution is being taken to ensure that they don't.

Yes, wolves were native to the UK until the 1600s and it has been seriously suggested that they be re-introduced. The main reason that this has not been done is population density - we have a tenth of your population in a fiftieth of the area.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:28 pm

Like I said. As soon as wolves use up all the deer, elk and other game, they'll come knocking on cattle ranges, sheep ranches etc. Wolves are not dumb enough to starve because their normal food sources are gone. Humans are though.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:42 pm

hoppy;827773 wrote: Wolf packs are capable of taking down large game animals. The fact that few domestic livestock is lost to wolves is because they haven't multiplied into large packs in more populated areas yet. Just wait until they use up their usual prey. Didn't they have wolves in parts of Great Britian once? By all means re-introduce them to your country.

Wait until they use up their usual prey? HUH? How many thousands of

years were they predators and never ONCE "used up" their usual prey?

The species were in perfect balance with each other. Wolves keep

those herds STRONG. Still do. Investigate what parts of Yellowstone

are coming back because the wolves have reduced the elk numbers

a little.

There are many things livestock handlers can do to limit damage from

wolves.

For starters:

http://ag.ansc.purdue.edu/sheep/ansc442 ... guard.html

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:53 pm

First off, I'm not anti-wolf. I just don't think they should be introduced helter-skelter any old place. Yellowstone is not that big an area for a wolf pack. Coyotes are spreading into cities. They are a much bigger and a dangerous threat. Just don't shoot or kill one in a city or town. The animal huggers will hang you from a lampost.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:57 pm

hoppy;827790 wrote: Like I said. As soon as wolves use up all the deer, elk and other game, they'll come knocking on cattle ranges, sheep ranches etc. Wolves are not dumb enough to starve because their normal food sources are gone. Humans are though.

Neither are they dumb enough, or capable of, using up all of the dear, elk and other game in the area.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:58 pm

They aren't just introduced any old place, though. There are lots and

lots of studies beforehand. The re-introduction of wolves into

Yellowstone is one of the most succesful operations EVER.

And I would say that it's more cities are spreading INTO the coyotes

than vice-versa. Most municipalities have laws against discharge of

a firearm (for any reason) within the city limits.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:03 pm

hoppy;827812 wrote: First off, I'm not anti-wolf. I just don't think they should be introduced helter-skelter any old place. Yellowstone is not that big an area for a wolf pack. Coyotes are spreading into cities. They are a much bigger and a dangerous threat. Just don't shoot or kill one in a city or town. The animal huggers will hang you from a lampost.

If your objection is to the coyote then why complain about the wolf?

The range available to the wolf is not restricted to the Yellowstone park, it covers most of three states in the northern rockies - well enough room to sustain the three or four packs that exist.

Pack management is in place to ensure that numbers do not go beyond the land's ability to support.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:14 pm

Red:-4

The gray wolf is one of the most beautiful and smartest animals. I love them and hope they'll remain an empowered species.....

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:08 pm

I'm curious to know how coyotes are dangerous. To other animals? Prey yes and that means small dogs and cats too who depend on their owners to keep them safe and not running loose outside.

To humans? No. The coyote does not want to confront you. It wants you to leave it alone and will generally run when it sees you coming. I have lived among coyotes for 33 years and I have a deep regard for them. I have come face to face with several of them and we regarded each other warily before they took off the other way. Seeing them up close was a total thrill. The only true danger I can see for humans is if they happen along a rabid coyote which would be a seldom thing.

Coyotes here are routinely poisoned with strychnine which causes a horribly painful, slow and convulsing death. They are also trapped and shot. As a result my area has an unusually large number of cottontails and jackrabbits because there aren't enough coyotes to do what nature intended of them.

I don't like seeing any animal get killed and that goes for livestock too. But that's why they made cowboys. Hire some. It's not the coyote's fault (or the wolf's fault) that they took down your sheep or elk. It is purely human doing. We act like we are the only and the supreme species on this planet and we are screwing it up completely. In short, we are a repugnant species.

Oh yeah...I'm one of those infernal animal huggers.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:20 pm

RedGlitter;827923 wrote: I'm curious to know how coyotes are dangerous. To other animals? Prey yes and that means small dogs and cats too who depend on their owners to keep them safe and not running loose outside.

To humans? No. The coyote does not want to confront you. It wants you to leave it alone and will generally run when it sees you coming. I have lived among coyotes for 33 years and I have a deep regard for them. I have come face to face with several of them and we regarded each other warily before they took off the other way. Seeing them up close was a total thrill. The only true danger I can see for humans is if they happen along a rabid coyote which would be a seldom thing.

Coyotes here are routinely poisoned with strychnine which causes a horribly painful, slow and convulsing death. They are also trapped and shot. As a result my area has an unusually large number of cottontails and jackrabbits because there aren't enough coyotes to do what nature intended of them.

I don't like seeing any animal get killed and that goes for livestock too. But that's why they made cowboys. Hire some. It's not the coyote's fault (or the wolf's fault) that they took down your sheep or elk. It is purely human doing. We act like we are the only and the supreme species on this planet and we are screwing it up completely. In short, we are a repugnant species.

Oh yeah...I'm one of those infernal animal huggers.

Apparently they take sheep.

Damn'd ungrateful that - you'd think they'd know their place!

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:07 pm

Bryn Mawr;827935 wrote: Apparently they take sheep.

Damn'd ungrateful that - you'd think they'd know their place!

:wah:

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:16 pm

Bryn Mawr;827935 wrote: Apparently they take sheep.

Damn'd ungrateful that - you'd think they'd know their place!

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:27 pm

Bryn Mawr;827827 wrote: If your objection is to the coyote then why complain about the wolf?

The range available to the wolf is not restricted to the Yellowstone park, it covers most of three states in the northern rockies - well enough room to sustain the three or four packs that exist.

Pack management is in place to ensure that numbers do not go beyond the land's ability to support.

And, how is pack management carried out?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:32 pm

Bryn Mawr;827935 wrote: Apparently they take sheep.

Damn'd ungrateful that - you'd think they'd know their place!

Apparently also, they are learning to hunt in packs. They are coming into big cities. Yeah, I know, that was once their natural range. well, they LOVE to kill the dogs and cats you critter huggers so adore. And that's a fact. they are losing their fear of humans.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:46 pm

hoppy;828018 wrote: Apparently also, they are learning to hunt in packs. They are coming into big cities. Yeah, I know, that was once their natural range. well, they LOVE to kill the dogs and cats you critter huggers so adore. And that's a fact. they are losing their fear of humans.

Wouldn't ever kill mine because they are kept inside where they belong...

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:11 pm

valerie;828020 wrote: Wouldn't ever kill mine because they are kept inside where they belong...

Exactly.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:30 pm

RedGlitter;828026 wrote: Exactly.

How about yourselves? Do you always stay indoors too? If coyotes are learning to hunt in packs, how long before they learn they can take down a person or kid on a bike, or a jogger or hiker? Coyotes will kill for sport.

My daughter and family lived in an old farmhouse. About 3 miles from a small town, 1/4 mile from nearest neighbor. Husband was a nerd who refused to own a firearm. Once, daughter came home late in evening. Several coyotes were loitering around in the back yard, not a bit afraid. Her husband was in the house. He was afraid to come out. She had to wait until the coyotes left on their own.

Another afternoon she came home and found their mother cat and all the kittens ripped apart.

Where I live, the season on coyotes is always open and there are no bag limits or shooting hours.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:37 am

---------------- Listening to: Jim Stafford / Swamp Witch via FoxyTuneshoppy;828028 wrote: How about yourselves? Do you always stay indoors too? If coyotes are learning to hunt in packs, how long before they learn they can take down a person or kid on a bike, or a jogger or hiker? Coyotes will kill for sport.

My daughter and family lived in an old farmhouse. About 3 miles from a small town, 1/4 mile from nearest neighbor. Husband was a nerd who refused to own a firearm. Once, daughter came home late in evening. Several coyotes were loitering around in the back yard, not a bit afraid. Her husband was in the house. He was afraid to come out. She had to wait until the coyotes left on their own.

Another afternoon she came home and found their mother cat and all the kittens ripped apart.

Where I live, the season on coyotes is always open and there are no bag limits or shooting hours.

Like domestic dogs, coyotes and wolves are canids and they have always formed packs. They may hunt singly as well as with group effort but they are still members of a family. This is not new. The reason we have coyotes coming around into our personal yards and cities is because we've encroached so much on their habitat and screwed up their part of the ecosystem so much that we've run them out of their own territory. They have nowhere else to go- thanks to us.

You comment about coyotes killing for sport. So? In the animal world this is supposed to happen. Whether for food or "sport" they are still doing what nature intended them to do. WE may not like it but that's too bad- nature doesn't care what we think, natural laws exist for a reason- to keep a harmonic BALANCE. Things are not in balance now because we humans messed it up to begin with and now our standard answer in these situations is to slaughter these animals. We can't seem to think further than our nose to come up with a viable solution. Just kill whatever the problem is.

So there were coyotes in your daughter's yard- I notice you say they live on a farm. So I am not surprised they came around. It's not like they were standing around in the city square. Just where are they supposed to go?

I feel terrible about the cats being killed but had they been inside it wouldn't have occurred. This is the cat owner's negligence, not the fault of the coyote. The coyote was doing what it's supposed to- seeking out prey. That they were someone's pets is a very sad thing but you know what, that happened to me too when I first moved here. We thought since we lived in the middle of the desert with no one around that it was okay to let the cats and dogs wander. Remember this was 33 years ago when it was standard to think like that. I lost several cats. So we learned to keep them in. I am sickened to admit this but my dad waited all night for a coyote to come onto our land (which was his land until we got there) and he shot and killed it, then dragged its bloody body around our acre to warn off other coyotes.

Time passed and we rethought that and realized the problem was us moving into coyote territory, not the other way around.

I seriously doubt your family was in danger of those coyotes in the yard. In my learning about them, I have not heard of any coyote attacking a human. I'm certainly not saying it couldn't happen, just that I would be very surprised.

You say the animals were not afraid. Don't you suppose that's because they are being forced into human territory and are getting used to us? In the same way the bears in our national parks are getting used to us and coming into our camps at night. Why does no one realize this? It's basic common sense. I apply this to the OP about the wolves as well. Both animals are being persecuted for doing what they are made to do.

Call me an animal hugger or treehugging hippie or whatever but I have regard for ALL animals. And because of that I try to learn as much about them as I can. If more people would educate themselves about the animal world, instead of resorting to killing everything, we could eliminate the slaughter and come up with solutions.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 2:40 am

hoppy;828014 wrote: And, how is pack management carried out?

By culling where necessary.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 2:43 am

hoppy;828028 wrote: How about yourselves? Do you always stay indoors too? If coyotes are learning to hunt in packs, how long before they learn they can take down a person or kid on a bike, or a jogger or hiker? Coyotes will kill for sport.

My daughter and family lived in an old farmhouse. About 3 miles from a small town, 1/4 mile from nearest neighbor. Husband was a nerd who refused to own a firearm. Once, daughter came home late in evening. Several coyotes were loitering around in the back yard, not a bit afraid. Her husband was in the house. He was afraid to come out. She had to wait until the coyotes left on their own.

Another afternoon she came home and found their mother cat and all the kittens ripped apart.

Where I live, the season on coyotes is always open and there are no bag limits or shooting hours.

What happened to the discussion about wolves?

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 3:51 am

In the last decade or so foxes have colonised London. I worried that they'd take babies since they are scavengers (amongst other things) and the young of other species are natural prey to them. So far it hasn't happened.

The cat population has plummeted though, which is allowing something of a recovery of the small bird population. It's not certain that foxes are responsible, though having seen a fox chasing a cat, and knowing that they are also capable of ambush hunting I believe they are.

We can live closer to large predators than I had realised. The same may well be true of wolves. However, I think the only place in these islands they could be reintroduced is the Scottish Highlands. As a walker that makes me nervous, but I realise that most of my nervousness stems from ignorance.

Anyway, I can pass the buck on this one: How would the Scots feel about a reintroduction of wolves? It's their country and their decision.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 4:55 am

Well. sorry but I'm not an animal idolizer. I don't believe in eradicating a species but do believe in managing them. If that means killing off a certain number, fine, so be it. I don't believe in keeping dogs and cats indoors all the time either. Cats are often kept around farms for rodent control. Dogs for other reasons, like to give warning of intruders, for hunting, for herding purposes. Anyone who has spent time on a farm knows you can't keep your animals indoors at all times. That is inhumane. Any farmer knows you can't stand watch over each cow, pig or chicken all day each day.

As far as original ranges for animal species goes, maybe that notion should apply to people too. Everybody back to your origination, folks. Get real people.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:02 am

hoppy;828105 wrote: Well. sorry but I'm not an animal idolizer. I don't believe in eradicating a species but do believe in managing them. If that means killing off a certain number, fine, so be it. I don't believe in keeping dogs and cats indoors all the time either. Cats are often kept around farms for rodent control. Dogs for other reasons, like to give warning of intruders, for hunting, for herding purposes. Anyone who has spent time on a farm knows you can't keep your animals indoors at all times. That is inhumane. Any farmer knows you can't stand watch over each cow, pig or chicken all day each day.

As far as original ranges for animal species goes, maybe that notion should apply to people too. Everybody back to your origination, folks. Get real people.

So where in the above is there anything that goes against the current wolf management programme?

If the highlighted section states your position then what is your problem with the wolf?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:18 am

As long as the wolf populations are managed, I don't believe I have a problem. I'm not sobbing my eyes out if some have to be killed to keep numbers in check. As far as wolves keeping the elk herds in Yellowstone healthy, hunting could have done that too. The problem I have with hunters though, most big game hunters are 'head hunters'. I always hunted for meat. A fat doe was, to me, more valuable than a buck with a huge rack. Can't eat the horns, mate. Lol.

The town I live in is presently over run with deer. We are allowed to take doe but the idiot hunters pass them up hoping for a big rack to come their way. I don't think the city fathers would favor introducing wolves to solve that problem though.

Sorry if I wander off subject a bit. Old age I guess.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 6:50 am

In 1942, Michael Dusiak, section foreman for the Canadian Pacific Railway, was attacked by a wolf while patrolling a section of track on a speeder (small 4-wheeled open railroad car). Dusiak relates, "It happened so fast and as it was still very dark, I thought an engine had hit me first. After getting up from out of the snow very quickly, I saw the wolf which was about fifty feet away from me and it was coming towards me, I grabbed the two axes (tools on the speeder), one in each hand and hit the wolf as he jumped at me right in the belly and in doing so lost one axe. Then the wolf started to circle me and got so close to me at times that I hit him with the head of the axe and it was only the wielding of the axe that kept him from me. All this time he was growling and gnashing his teeth. Then he would stop circling me and jump at me and I would hit him with the head of the axe. This happened five times and he kept edging me closer to the woods which was about 70 feet away. We fought this way for about fifteen minutes and I fought to stay out in the open close to the track. I hit him quite often as he came at me very fast and quick and I was trying to hit him a solid blow in the head for I knew if once he got me down it would be my finish. Then in the course of the fight he got me over onto the north side of the track and we fought there for about another ten minutes. Then a west bound train came along travelling about thirty miles an hour and stopped about half a train length west of us and backed up to where we were fighting. The engineer, fireman and brakeman came off the engine armed with picks and other tools, and killed the wolf."

It should be noted that this wolf was skinned and inspected by an Investigator Crichton, a Conservation Officer. His assessment was that the animal was a young healthy wolf in good condition although it appeared lean. ("A Record of Timber Wolf Attacking a Man," JOURNAL OF MAMMOLOGY, Vol. 28, No. 3, August 1947)

Common Man Institute, in cooperation with Abundant Wildlife Society of North America, has done extensive research on wolves and their history for several years. We have gathered evidence on wolf attacks which occurred in North America.

A forester employed by the Province of British Colombia was checking some timber for possible harvest in the 1980s. He was met by a small pack of three wolves. The forester yelled at the wolves to frighten them away. Instead, the wolves came towards him in a threatening manner and he was forced to retreat and climb a nearby tree for safety. The wolves remained at the base of the tree. The forester had a portable radio, but was unable to contact his base, due to distance, until evening. When the call for help came in, two Conservation Officers with the Ministry of Environment were flown to the area by floatplane to rescue the treed forester.

When the Conservation Officers arrived, the forester was still in the tree and one wolf, the apparent leader of the pack, was still at the base of the tree. The officers, armed with shotguns, shot at the wolf and missed. The wolf ran for cover and then started circling and howling near the two officers. After a couple missed shots, the wolf was finally shot and killed.

The wolf tested negative for rabies. It appeared healthy in every respect, but was very lean. The Conservation Officers felt the attack was caused by hunger. (Taped Interviews and a photo of the wolf on file at Abundant Wildlife Society of North America.)

This is but one example from British Colombia. Wolves overran Vancouver Island in the 1980s. Attacks became so common that articles were published in Canadian magazines documenting such attacks. (Copies available upon request.)

Wolf Attacks on humans have occurred in national parks, too. In August 1987, a sixteen-year-old girl was bitten by a wild wolf in Algonquin Provincial Park in Ontario. The girl was camping in the park with a youth group and shined a flashlight at the wolf. The wolf reacted to the light by biting the girl on the arm. That bite was not hard and due to the thick sweater and sweatshirt the girl was wearing, she sustained two scratch marks on her arm. The wolf was shot by Natural Resources personnel and tested negative for rabies. (Interview with Ron Tozer, Park Naturalist for Algonquin Provincial Park, 7/25/88.)

Well-known wolf biologist Dr. David Mech took issue with this attack stating it couldn't really be considered an authentic attack since the girl wasn't injured more severely. It was exactly nine years when such an attack would take place.

Algonquin Provincial Park is one of several areas where people are encouraged to "howl" at the wolves in hopes of a response from the wild wolves in the area. In August, 1996, the Delventhal family of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were spending a nine-day family vacation in Algonquin and joined a group of Scouts in "howling" at the wolves. They were answered by the howl of a solitary wolf.

That night the Delventhals decided to sleep out under the stars. Young Zachariah was dreaming when he suddenly felt excruciating pain in his face. A lone wolf had bit him in the face and was dragging him from his sleeping bag. Zach screamed and Tracy, Zach's Mother, raced to his side and picked him up, saturating her thermal shirt with blood from Zach's wounds.

The wolf stood menacingly less than a yard away. Tracy yelled at her husband, Thom, who leapt from his sleeping bag and charged the wolf. The wolf retreated and then charged at Tracy and Zach. The charges were repeated. Finally the wolf left. Thom turned a flashlight on 11-year-old Zach and gasped "Oh, my God!" "The boy's face had been ripped open. His nose was crushed. Parts of his mouth and right cheek were torn and dangling. Blood gushed from puncture wounds below his eyes, and the lower part of his right ear was missing." Zach was taken to a hospital in Toronto where a plastic surgeon performed four hours of reconstructive surgery. Zach received more than 80 stitches in his face.

Canadian officials baited the Delventhals' campsite and captured and destroyed a 60-lb wild male wolf. No further attacks have occurred since. (Cook, Kathy; "Night of the Wolf" READER'S DIGEST, July 1997, pp. 114-119.)

Humans have been attacked by wolves in Alaska. The late David Tobuk carried scars on his face from a wolf attack on him as a small child. The incident occurred around the turn of the century in interior Alaska. David was playing in his village near a river. An old wolf came into the village and bit David in the face and started to carry him off. Other Eskimos saw the wolf dragging the child off and started yelling and screaming. The wolf dropped the child and was shot by an old Eskimo trapper who had a gun. (Interview with Frank Tobuk, brother, Bettles, Alaska, December 1988.)

Paul Tritt, an Athabascan Indian, was attacked by a lone wolf while working a trap line. Paul was setting a snare, looked up and saw a wolf lunging at him. He threw his arm up in front of his face and it was bitten severely by the wolf. A struggle ensued. Tritt was able to get to his sled, grab a gun and kill the wolf. Nathaniel Frank, a companion, helped Tritt wash the wound with warm water. Frank took Tritt, via dog sled, to Fort Yukon to see a doctor. The arm healed, but Tritt never regained full use of it. Several years later, the arm developed problems and had to be amputated. (Interview with Paul Tritt, Venetie, Alaska, November, 1988)

Two wolf attacks on humans occurred in 2000.

Icy Bay, Alaska - Six-year-old John Stenglein and a nine-year-old friend were playing outside his family's trailer at a logging camp when a wild wolf came out of the woods towards the boys. The boys ran and the wolf attacked young Stenglein from the back, biting him on the back and buttocks. Adults, hearing the boy's screams, came and chased the wolf away. The wolf returned a few moments later and was shot. According to Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) officials, the wolf was a healthy wild wolf that apparently attacked without provocation. The boy was flown to Yakutat and recieved stitches there for his wounds. Later, however, the bites became infected and the boy had to be hospitalized. (Reports and Interviews on file and available upon request.)

Vargas Island, British Colombia - University student, Scott Langevin, 23, was on a kayak trip with friends. They camped out on a beach and, about 1 AM, Langevin awoke with something pulling on his sleeping bag. He looked out and came face to face with a wild wolf. Langevin yelled at the wolf and it attacked, biting him on the hand. Langevin attempted to force the wolf toward a nearby campfire, but as he turned, the wolf jumped on his back and started biting him on the back of his head. Friends, hearing his yells, came to his aid and scared the wolf away. Fifty (50) stitches were required to close the wound on Langevin's head. British Colombia Ministry of Enviroment officials speculate the reason for the attack was due to the wolves occasionally being fed by humans although there was no evidence that Langevin or any of his party fed these animals. (Reports and Interviews on file and available upon request.)

This is but a brief summary of a few verifiable accounts of attacks on humans by healthy wild wolves in North American History.

Biologists tell us that the wolves of Asia and North America are one and the same species. Wolf attacks are common in many parts of Asia.

By all means, introduce wolves to Great Britain, part of their natural range at one time. What you want for the USA, you should also have.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 7:36 am

Hopper: I think Bryn Mawr's point about comparative population density is valid. There's nowhere in England or Wales that could support a wolf pack, except the Scottish Highlands north of the Great Glen - and it would have to be given over to them completely. There must be a minimum of 50,000 people (wild guess) living there, many in isloated small communities or farms. Human/wolf contact would be too much of an issue (especially in the light of your most informative post - thanks). I don't think it's on.

We already do work on reintroducing some species and protecting and encouraging others: Beaver, Reindeer and White Tailed Sea Eagle have been or are being re-introduced but it's difficult and something to be very cautious about because we can't with any certainty predict the effects: escaped Mink have become a pest, as have grey squirrels; we have wallabies in Derbyshire (escapes), persistent rumours of cougar-like animals in the West Country, parakeets in south west London, and Nessie in Scotland

!

Red Kites have been encouraged back out of their last Welsh fastness, you see Buzzards right up to the M25 now, but when I was a lad nowhere east of Dorset (well, some maybe, but I never saw them) and Egrets have come of their own accord to Devon, where the Peregrines are hunting the cliffs again after nearly being wiped out by pesticides in the '50s. Ospreys are becoming more common and I've seen one in the Midlands, which was a heck of a surprise (usually only found in a few places in Scotland and guarded night and day). It might be wild migration, but I suspect a deliberate release programme since there's certainly one nearby for Red Kites.

I think we do our bit in the conservation sense, but a top man-killing predator in a place as crowded and unused to them as this is a step too far. Given that there is much more space in the US, you have existing populations and they ARE a wonderful species I think your case is different. I note you don't argue in favour of wiping them out, but I do think perhaps they might have some area where they are protected in a land as huge as the USA? Culling will be a necessity. We find it so here.

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sun Apr 06, 2008 1:30 pm

hoppy;828110 wrote: As long as the wolf populations are managed, I don't believe I have a problem. I'm not sobbing my eyes out if some have to be killed to keep numbers in check. As far as wolves keeping the elk herds in Yellowstone healthy, hunting could have done that too. The problem I have with hunters though, most big game hunters are 'head hunters'. I always hunted for meat. A fat doe was, to me, more valuable than a buck with a huge rack. Can't eat the horns, mate. Lol.

The town I live in is presently over run with deer. We are allowed to take doe but the idiot hunters pass them up hoping for a big rack to come their way. I don't think the city fathers would favor introducing wolves to solve that problem though.

Sorry if I wander off subject a bit. Old age I guess.

Well, you are a bit all over the map, hence the name I 'spect.

Man hunting elk does NOT keep the population as healthy as wolves do

for the precise reasons you mentioned. Man doesn't want to kill the old,

sick, and weak members of the herd. (And YES, I am aware that sometimes

very young are taken, too)

I grew up on a 125 acre horse ranch. No, you can't watch all the animals

all the time. But you can do many things to lessen the impact of

predation. The link I posted to guard dogs is one thing. Your daughter

could have gotten out of the car and yelled at the coyotes. It's

what I would have done. Or keep a couple firecrackers around to

throw at them, they'll leave.

I think talking suburban and rural are 2 different things. It is FAR more

humane to keep your animals in the house. That way they aren't

exposed to all kinds of diseases, fights, and car hits. If you have barn

cats (and I take care of a 7 horse place with 3 barn cats) for rodents,

then yes, you might have to face losing one but that's the choice

you make and the chance you take.

All my growing up, my dad hunted. That was important addition to

the family food supply. The reasoning back then for not killing too many

does was so that they could have other deer. A single buck can

impregnate many does. If you are in an area overrun with deer, then

killing does makes more sense.

Not letting your animals run is very important, for more than just the

coyotes getting them. I had my very beautiful palomino horse run

into the barbed wire fence by the neighbor's dog.

I know, I'm all over the map, too. I shall plead olad age as well.