Wolf Experience on Vanc Isle - Lesson

[RRCo.]

Easy answer - they are public lands, belonging to the entire citizenry of the United States.

The BLM is essentially subsidizing the ranchers' operations, while denying the public use of public lands.

Given that "natural areas" (like national parks) are tiny little disconnected tracts of land, it makes a lot of sense to rehabilitate public land and re-naturalize it, for the benefit of everyone.

For several species, their long term success depends on free movement over larger areas. Restoration of ecosystems and undoing a small amount of the massive environmental destruction of the past couple of centuries is a worthy thing in the eyes of most.

That's why, for example, dams are being decommissioned and rivers allowed to flow freely, to re-establish natural environments for fish and many other species.

Honestly, why do some folks think that every square inch needs to be plowed, grazed, drilled, drained or paved?

Well, as far as that area of the US is concerned, the wolf they introduced is not the wolf that was native to that area, and personally I fail to see how killing "every damn last elk" is "restoring the natural balance". Maybe you can explain that one?

Fact is, no one knows what the "natural balance" was in that area, or any other for that matter.

As for the "people of the United States", has anyone asked them? As if!

I'm all in favour of helping and preserving the environment as much as possible, I do as much as I can, but it's not my religion.

Yes, national parks are going to remain disconnected, unless you'd like to give up say 80% of your property so that all the people displaced by their "reconnection" can live somewhere else? What's next, tear down the fences and get the bison herds roaming the prairie again? I hear all the rhetoric of the radical environmentalist. They usually live in nice, big houses I've noticed.

Who thinks "every inch needs to be plowed..."? Why do some folks always throw up black & white arguments as strawmen to stifle serious and informed debate? Typical propaganda.

 

[Ardent]

Well, as far as that area of the US is concerned, the wolf they introduced is not the wolf that was native to that area, and personally I fail to see how killing "every damn last elk" is "restoring the natural balance".

Fact is, no one knows what the "natural balance" was in that area, or any other for that matter.

I'm all in favour of helping and preserving the environment as much as possible, I do as much as I can, but it's not my religion.

Yes, national parks are going to remain disconnected, unless you'd like to give up say 80% of your property so that all the people displaced by their "reconnection" can live somewhere else? What's next, tear down the fences and get the bison herds roaming the prairie again? I hear all the rhetoric of the radical environmentalist. They usually live in nice, big houses I've noticed.

Why do some folks always throw up black & white arguments as strawmen to stifle serious and informed debate?

Wolves are physically incapable of wiping out elk, they've lived in conjunction with them or their close relatives in virtually every part of their massive range. Elk habituated to predation are extremely adept at protecting young and raising them despite predation. Humans however are capable of wiping out species as we've seen.

 

[kkahmann]

The BLM manages a huge chunk of property in the western US. They raise a little money by leasing the grazing rights which is better than nothing because no one, not even Ted Turner, is going to pay taxes on totally unproductive land. Unless you have access to water that land is totally unproductive.
Wolves will live there as will other game and eventually they will reach some kinda predetor-prey balance. Ranchers are going to lose stock --no way around that.

 

[bearkilr]

Hey folks... Been doing some research on wolves the last few days... I made an honest mistake based on breed... I apologize to bearklr for that... Its a real hodge podge out therte and I spent a lot of time researching my own haunts and thought it reapplied... It doesn't... My bad... While I still maintain yotes anmd wolves interbreed in bear's back yard... I can't make a definitive statement saying what he shot and displayed is not a wolf of some sort... My bad ....

No worries, it's good to have discussions. Sometimes the anonimity of the internet gets everyone carried away, myself included of course.
On the subject, yesterday, I was talking with a local game warden and we were discussing the coydog,coywolf,etc. theories. He mentioned a trapper in a more southern area of the province caught a huge coyote which had some very distinct doglike features, the strangest of which was head shape and a strange colour, almost like a rusty red. Quite ugly, he mentioned. His theory was not so much that coyotes and wolves interbreed, but perhaps more a case of coyotes with dogs and wolves with dogs. Either way, it seems these freaks are moving in a westerly direction.

Yeah... I would sure love to see more pics of that kill... So we could discuss breed etc...

I'll see if I can post a couple more after doing some lighting/contrast editing, they were taken with my crappy smartphone camera.

 

[bearkilr]

Wolves are physically incapable of wiping out elk, they've lived in conjunction with them or their close relatives in virtually every part of their massive range. Elk habituated to predation are extremely adept at protecting young and raising them despite predation. Humans however are capable of wiping out species as we've seen.

And that right there is a large part of the reason for the wolf problem in areas where there was no former problem. Wolves are very secretive and shy away from human activity, unless we wipe out their prey in their remote ranges and they have no choice but to migrate into areas of denser prey and human populations.
Game management is a difficult, if not impossible, practice in some areas of Canada where certain user groups have no seasons or bag limits. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Ardent]

Now the real question bear is about this 6.5x47 Kimber...? You rebarreling, or did you buy one done? I thought I remembered a Montana on the EE a couple years ago in 6x47L or 6.5x47L... Sounds like the perfect combination or gun and chambering, there.

 

[bearkilr]

Now the real question bear is about this 6.5x47 Kimber...? You rebarreling, or did you buy one done? I thought I remembered a Montana on the EE a couple years ago in 6x47L or 6.5x47L... Sounds like the perfect combination or gun and chambering, there.

I was interested in a 257 Roberts in a Montana or a 260, but the latter is hard to find it seems.
This one came up in a trade from a great CGN'r at the perfect moment and I always prefer when someone else goes through the wait,etc for rebarrel, I'm too impatient.

Kind of an obscure/uncommon caliber, which makes it interesting. I knew nothing about it until this deal. Ballistics show it's pretty close to the 260, so we'll see.

Now I need a 325 WSM to add to the 6.5 and 308

 

[Ardent]

If you don't like it, gimme a shout!

 

[RRCo.]

Wolves are physically incapable of wiping out elk, they've lived in conjunction with them or their close relatives in virtually every part of their massive range. Elk habituated to predation are extremely adept at protecting young and raising them despite predation. Humans however are capable of wiping out species as we've seen.

Do you mean wolves as a continental species vs. elk as a continental species?

Apparently they did coexist, as their existence today proves. What the cycles of boom and bust were, what regional populations rose and fell we now have no idea. Like much else about the subject.

What we are supposed to do is manage the populations in a humane and sustainable manner. Since we have taken over so much of the environment, there really is no alternative. The most humane and precise way to manage a large non-migratory herbivore population is obviously by hunting/culling.

The wolf has shown the habit of "surplus killing", or killing for pleasure, on a large scale. This is part of "nature" but as population managers we do not need to allow this kind of pointless cruelty and boom and bust cycle. It serves no purpose. Reintroducing wolves into small areas where they once existed is an artificial construction. When the prey cannot escape/migrate as they would have in times past, the Yellowstone scenario is the result.

It may make a cool experiment for wolf-lovers who fancy a some "raw action" but that strikes me as a little sick.

 

[Ardent]

The wolf has shown the habit of "surplus killing", or killing for pleasure, on a large scale. This is part of "nature" but as population managers we do not need to allow this kind of pointless cruelty and boom and bust cycle. It serves no purpose. Reintroducing wolves into small areas where they once existed is an artificial construction. When the prey cannot escape/migrate as they would have in times past, the Yellowstone scenario is the result.

It may make a cool experiment for wolf-lovers who fancy a some "raw action" but that strikes me as a little sick.

I have never, ever, seen this and I live and work in an area of Canada with likely the highest Wolf densities going, we have more than Coyotes out here. I am by no means an authority on the subject, but I hear this kill-for-pleasure theory espoused often by guys from the south or people unfamiliar with Wolves. I've yet to see a single Wolf kill site where the Wolves didn't clean up the carcass.

It's bad survival strategy on the part of Wolves, as taking large prey is risky business even if it's just a doe and they expend enormous amounts of energy they have to replace by taking down an animal. If they do this, it would be in very odd circumstances such as in a glut of animals or where Wolves are pressured and are too skittish to stay at a kill site. Where do you live and where did your wolf background come from RRco? I ask not as a confrontation but you seem very familiar with the matter and I'm interested, as I can only judge by the Timberwolves I see up here. Anything I say about Wolves comes from the firsthand experiences up here, not what I've read. So, it could be limited, and it could be more accurate than internet theories.

 

[RRCo.]

I have never, ever, seen this and I live and work in an area of Canada with likely the highest Wolf densities going, we have more than Coyotes out here. I am by no means an authority on the subject, but I hear this kill-for-pleasure theory espoused often by guys from the south or people unfamiliar with Wolves. I've yet to see a single Wolf kill site where the Wolves didn't clean up the carcass.

It's bad survival strategy on the part of Wolves, as taking large prey is risky business even if it's just a doe and they expend enormous amounts of energy they have to replace by taking down an animal. If they do this, it would be in very odd circumstances such as in a glut of animals or where Wolves are pressured and are too skittish to stay at a kill site. Where do you live and where did your wolf background come from RRco? I ask not as a confrontation but you seem very familiar with the matter and I'm interested, as I can only judge by the Timberwolves I see up here. Anything I say about Wolves comes from the firsthand experiences up here, not what I've read. So, it could be limited, and it could be more accurate than internet theories.

Regarding the "surplus killing" or killing for pleasure, this is a well-documented phenomenon. Several specific instances were cited in that link I posted. I remember posting a link to a site that had numerous photos of numbers of does and calves killed by wolves after their introduction to Yellowstone and left unconsumed, at least by wolves. How long would any carcass remain unconsumed if left unguarded by the predator?

You seem to dispute the existence of this phenomenon based on the fact that is potentially harmful to the wolves themselves in the long term? I don't believe wolves are noted for their long term thinking are they?

Yes, the site I linked to here is a site that is plainly opposed to the introduction of Canadian timber wolves to the Yellowstone area and others, however we have to use our judgement when considering things we didn't witness personally, don't we? I don't discard "anecdotal" reports just because I happen to disagree with them, under the pretense of "scientific method".

I claim no expertise in the area of wolves, but I do claim the ability to read, remember and think, logically. I have no stake in the matter of wolves anywhere. Like coyotes, hyenas and dingos they are part of the natural world, but their resemblance to domesticated dogs and a couple of Hollywood movies has not deprived me of the ability to think, rather than emote; not that I'm saying that applies to you, but it plainly does to some people.

Respectfully...

 

[bearkilr]

Regarding the "surplus killing" or killing for pleasure, this is a well-documented phenomenon. Several specific instances were cited in that link I posted. I remember posting a link to a site that had numerous photos of numbers of does and calves killed by wolves after their introduction to Yellowstone and left unconsumed, at least by wolves. How long would any carcass remain unconsumed if left unguarded by the predator?

You seem to dispute the existence of this phenomenon based on the fact that is potentially harmful to the wolves themselves in the long term? I don't believe wolves are noted for their long term thinking are they?

Yes, the site I linked to here is a site that is plainly opposed to the introduction of Canadian timber wolves to the Yellowstone area and others, however we have to use our judgement when considering things we didn't witness personally, don't we? I don't discard "anecdotal" reports just because I happen to disagree with them, under the pretense of "scientific method".

I claim no expertise in the area of wolves, but I do claim the ability to read, remember and think, logically. I have no stake in the matter of wolves anywhere. Like coyotes, hyenas and dingos they are part of the natural world, but their resemblance to domesticated dogs and a couple of Hollywood movies has not deprived me of the ability to think, rather than emote; not that I'm saying that applies to you, but it plainly does to some people.

Respectfully...

I would tend to somewhat agree with your thoughts on wolves, but this "bloodlust" seems to only happen with domestic livestock and in isolated areas where there is a large congregation of wild animals, such as Yellowstone elk or deer yarded up in a winter of excessive snow. The elk's gregarious nature of course plays a large part in this as well. I've been to Jackson Hole WY in the winter and saw literally hundreds of elk in one bunch during their winter feeding program.

I'll also echo Ardent's findings in that the wolves' main prey species in remote AB and MB isn't concentrated to the extent that permits a mass killing by a pack. I've discovered quite a few wolf kills and generally all that remains is hair. They will eat bones and all, whereas coyotes don't possess the jaw muscle strength to devour bones and they'll leave the rib cage, etc. behind. Coyotes will incidentally exhibit this same bloodlust with domestic livestock, mainly sheep.

 

[Ol' Smokey]

Regarding the "surplus killing" or killing for pleasure, this is a well-documented phenomenon. Several specific instances were cited in that link I posted. I remember posting a link to a site that had numerous photos of numbers of does and calves killed by wolves after their introduction to Yellowstone and left unconsumed, at least by wolves. How long would any carcass remain unconsumed if left unguarded by the predator?

You seem to dispute the existence of this phenomenon based on the fact that is potentially harmful to the wolves themselves in the long term? I don't believe wolves are noted for their long term thinking are they?

Yes, the site I linked to here is a site that is plainly opposed to the introduction of Canadian timber wolves to the Yellowstone area and others, however we have to use our judgement when considering things we didn't witness personally, don't we? I don't discard "anecdotal" reports just because I happen to disagree with them, under the pretense of "scientific method".

I claim no expertise in the area of wolves, but I do claim the ability to read, remember and think, logically. I have no stake in the matter of wolves anywhere. Like coyotes, hyenas and dingos they are part of the natural world, but their resemblance to domesticated dogs and a couple of Hollywood movies has not deprived me of the ability to think, rather than emote; not that I'm saying that applies to you, but it plainly does to some people.

Respectfully...

Ardent's point was that behaviour that is detrimental to the survival of a species tends to get weeded out by evolution.

A predator expending significant amounts of energy, and risking injury, for no nutritional value, well, that cannot be a common behaviour.

That does not mean that it cannot happen (it probably does).

I've tried to read everything I can get my hands on with regard to wolves over a few decades, and do not recall reading anywhere that it is part of the wolf's normal behavioral repertoire - or that of any large predator that I can think of, for that matter. I, of course, am willing to be proven wrong on that point.

It seems more likely, as bearkilr points out, where domestic animals are bunched up, or where large herds of prey are congregated.

Mass kills by coyotes and dogs are, however common occurrences for sheep owners.

 

[powder burner]

I always look forward to sightings................
(yeah, I know, terrible shot )

So how do you like the Muck Boots. i recognize the sole imprint.

 

[emerson]

The idea that a wolf, or especially a wolf pack, wouldn't consider a human as prey doesn't make any sense. If a person is afraid of entering a yard with 1 large dog, why would they not believe a pack of wolves who regularly "harvest" animals larger than us wouldn't consider us possible food. I would guess the reason more wolves don't attack people is that often those people have firearms and use them. Wolves seem very quick to identify danger and avoid it. If every time you saw a certain creature they shot at you, you would probably avoid them too.

 

[H4831]

So, a big question, will wolves kill just for fun?
Answer, "Yes, sometimes."
War Lake is about 25 miles west of McLeod Lake, in north central BC. Years ago, when there was no road closer than McLeod Lake, a long established otter den was located at the McLeod River outlet from War Lake. In the winter time the Otters would come out of their den, go into the rapids on the river, which never froze over, then swim under the ice on War Lake to catch fish to eat.
One time a large otter was on the ice on War Lake, about a hudred yards from the rapids. There was a nice covering of fresh snow on the lake, so everything that happened was plainly recorded.
Four wolves came along on a straight line crossing the lake, which just happened to take them by the otter. The otter was later lying on the ice, dead. My brother skinned the otter and the only mark on the animal was teeth marks where his head had been squashed by one bite of a wolf. One bite only, and one set of teeth marks.
The wolves, by their tracks in the snow, never stopped, or even broke stride. On passing the otter, one of them simply squashed it's head and carried on.
It was a large otter, the rug measuring four feet long.
This is proof they don't always eat what they kill.

 

[bearkilr]

So how do you like the Muck Boots. i recognize the sole imprint.

Good observation! Can you guess the size?
Muck's are great, best rubber boots I've owned, warm and feet don't sweat much. Uppers roll down so they can be worn as a camp style boot as well.

The idea that a wolf, or especially a wolf pack, wouldn't consider a human as prey doesn't make any sense. If a person is afraid of entering a yard with 1 large dog, why would they not believe a pack of wolves who regularly "harvest" animals larger than us wouldn't consider us possible food. I would guess the reason more wolves don't attack people is that often those people have firearms and use them. Wolves seem very quick to identify danger and avoid it. If every time you saw a certain creature they shot at you, you would probably avoid them too.

Please don't compare wolves to dogs, that's apples to oranges. There's nothing more destructive to wildlife than feral/roaming dogs, except maybe feral cats with birds. Dogs have no inherent fear of man, which makes them dangerous. Wolves fear man, which makes them skittish and they avoid us. This fear isn't an inherited trait from being shot at, it's the same trait pretty much every wild animal possesses, more of an instinctive fear. Dog packs have a tendency to kill for fun, they don't need meat for survival, there's dog food at home.

 

[bearkilr]

Yeah... I would sure love to see more pics of that kill... So we could discuss breed etc...

Here's another of the same wolf:

 

[RRCo.]

This thread is really about wolf attacks on or aggressive behaviour toward humans, so we are diverging with discussion of "surplus killing", although such behaviour might be a factor in attacks on humans of course, given that they are very easy prey indeed when unarmed.

Why for example do crows like to travel around in large flocks and harass other creatures even when they are no threat to the crows or their young? Seems to me it's a social activity and in common with other social animals, humans for one, the objectification of some other creature provides a unifying, pleasurable experience for the group.

Why will orcas hound a grey whale calf and it's mother, separating the two, killing the calf and eating only its tongue? Same dynamic presumably.

Why did the lions of Tsavo develop a taste for Indian railway workers? Easy kills, no risk of injury and very thin skins.

So, predators will target easy victims, and given the chance, that includes humans I have no doubt. There is simply no reason why they wouldn't.

 

[Pseudo]

Having live and Grown up in an area were there is a lot of wolves, Having had the opportunity to watch a pack hunt and take down a moose on a frozen lake and seen countless in the wild (and i'm still here and alive). I have yet to hear of someone getting attacked here in the Yukon. I have heard of lots of people getting attacked by bears, I have been charged by A grizzly, I have met someone who survived an attack by a mountain lion. I have heard of a trapper getting mauled by a Lynx however a wolf attacking a human, I have yet to meet someone. Not saying that it dosen't happen or couldn't happen but it's probably just as uncommon as Steve Irwins unfortunate sting ray incident. Maybe if you made body armour out of steak and standing outside in the middle of winter when food is scarce, maybe then but i still think you would die from hyperthermia or coyotes first.