I've seen videos of wolves hunting bison in Wood Buffalo National Park , supposedly exceptionally large.
Grizz
Largest Wolf Hunted
- Thread starter Thomas D'Arcy McGee
- Start date
I've seen videos of wolves hunting bison in Wood Buffalo National Park , supposedly exceptionally large.
Grizz
Trapped one this year that when on the board went 7ft from the nose to tail tip (no stretch). No weight, but I would comfortably say 100lbs +/- 5 lbs based on how it felt dragging it out/hanging it. I find folks often overestimate weights harvested critters. Bears are especially eye opening when you actually get them on a scale.
That is true of bears. I've shot one I thought to be a yearling. Confused me as to why I couldn't drag it. Only when I went to bear hug it to lift it did I realize it was much bigger than I thought. It was 245lbs gutted on the scale. Not sure what the live weight would have been. I figure close to 300lbs as the gut like was pretty big. Another time Ive shot a black bear that looked big only to find out it was 150lbs at best if I was being generous. Ears were rounded and low on the head and he was fluffy. Alot easier to drag though
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
That Northern store is a modern marvel. Everything from a jug of milk to a snowmobile to a wolf skin to a bucket of KFC!
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The Yellowstone wolves are seeded from that stock, as well. Curiously enough whatever weight you give the term, the Mackenzie drainage contains the wood bison’s range.
AB F+W did a covert wolf plant on Suffield base figuring the local ranchers wouldn't mind if they didn't know. There is one black male left as my son seen him on an elk hunt. Same misguided stupidity as Yellowstone, like they'll stay in the park.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Wolves in Yellowstone have actually improved things. The first thing they noticed was fish populations were increasing after decades of decline, they didn’t connect that to wolves initially and weren’t sure why it was happening. What happened is the wolves’ prey was trampling the stream beds feeding, as that’s where the best forage was. Turbidity (silt) levels were way up, which makes spawning redds (trout nests) less successful. Water temps were higher too as the streams were unshaded.
When wolves returned from being completely absent, they hunted the streams as they’re open sight lines and where the game was. They both reduced the overpopulation and pushed the prey back to forage in denser cover, with a multitude of unexpected positive results. Wolves are meant to be here, but there has to be a balance. Elimination isn’t a balance, and has negative repercussions for ecosystem health. Took this photo a few years ago, had a rifle and didn’t shoot any of them.
In past years I would have blazed away. It’s a good thing there’s no species above us to cull us for what we do, or would we ever be taking a hell of a beating.
I went to an event where Val Geist amd Charles Kay were speaking, it was the opinion of Charles Kay that the claimed benefits of wolves in Yellowstone are academic fraud.
Of course the wolves in Yellowstone are not the native wolves and are an invasive species.
IMO we're are going to see big changes in Yellowstone, it is only a matter of time before the various Tribes with Buffalo hunting language in their Treaties are hunting in Yellowstone.
Of course the wolves in Yellowstone are not the native wolves and are an invasive species.
IMO we're are going to see big changes in Yellowstone, it is only a matter of time before the various Tribes with Buffalo hunting language in their Treaties are hunting in Yellowstone.
Last edited:
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Thanks, only photo competition I ever won was for an African plains game hunt. Actually I was the runner up, but the winner was unable to go due to the scheduling conflict, so I got the call while in a Home Depot getting emergency septic system repair and plumbing parts. It improved that day some.
That photo made it into Canadian Geographic’s online edition which is somewhere south of the local paper in bragging rights, it could have been taken better I took it after most of a km of post holing in nuggets deep snow, off hand out of breath. Was a rushed shot, got the pack to come out to a couple calls. They quickly determined I wasn’t very desirable and carried on.
Out of all the animals out there, they’re most like us. Hence why their direct relatives so close they can interbreed, meaning they are technically the same species, live in most of our homes.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
The Mackenzie drainage contains a lot! You could damn near call them "Edmonton Wolves" and still be accurate. Maybe we should rebrand them as "Peace Wolves" and see if that encourages the hippies to frolic amongst them!
I think that, where wolves would be tolerated, they already are. You won't get any mileage to try to increase the numbers in areas with heavy agriculture interests. Fortunately we're in a much better place than the US with significantly less fractured habitat. Sure, they would be cool as hell to see out on the prairies, but given that they're still pretty common in the bush, I don't see a need to try to increase the numbers where they don't already exist.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
And a hundred and fifty years ago, much of that “a lot” contained wood bison. And wood bison were there because the ecosystem was rich and suited enough to support the continent’s largest land animal, which I don’t find unlikely to have supported a correspondingly larger strain of the continent’s most effective predator. Curiously the “Mackenzie drainage” also supports the largest contiguous moose population, doesn’t feel like too much of a stretch that the ‘a lot’ contained ‘a lot’ that grew to larger than average sizes for the continent feeding upon it.
Wood Bison former range map, vs MacKenzie drainage map.
