Bemidjihunter;
Now that I got you side steppin I'm gonna take advantage of it. Did you read the articals on the web? If not read it and then get back to me. In the articals I read- they had documented wolf attacks on HUMANS.

Now what wildlife biologists say, is what you tried to pull over on me, that there has been very few DOCUMENTED attacks on humans. The artical says that the reason biologists say that, is for it to be documented attack, the wolf has to be killed and tested for rabies. Everyone of the attacks thatI wrote about, the wolves were tested and found to be healthy. All of the attacks that I wrote about were unprovoked. Now-about the person who provoked the wolf you mentioned, I think any person would use anything you could find to defend yourself against a wild animal that was trying to kill you. I won't need your paying my medical bills cause I never go into the wooods without my insurance policy with (my S&W 44). If they even look at me they will be tested for rabies! You miss spoke, huh -Read the Articals!

I read an interesting article on hunting and wolves and wolves beginning to lose their fear of humans in Sports Illustrated of all places and the opening part of the article was about 2 wolves hunting down to hikers in Canada and though they were able to fend them off and slowly walk backwards to camp using a stick,the wolves followed most of the way...hunting them. I believe that wolves for the most part will leave a human alone, but as less people hunt them, and more wolves and more people butt heads and territory these numbers will rise. Also, read a lot about hounds getting attacked in wisconsin...that was in several outdoor magazines this past year.

mnprohunter;
Read the articals that Iwrote in my post to bemidji. There are many documented- unprovoked attacks by wolves on humans. I read the same artical as you mentioned and they said that wolves tend to not fear humans as some animals do.

Just GOOGLE (gray wolf attacks on humans) and there will be alot of reading on this subject. I'm not trying to cause mass hysteria, but what some would want us to know about the wolf just isn't true. The cases mentioned went back to the 1800's up to the present. If you ever have a wolf case you out, the look in their eyes, will chill you to the bone and you will never forget it.

I have been lucky enough to see wolves in the wild on several occassions, and though at a safe distance and in no harm it is a chilling experience as they are a cunning predator. I also know a guy down by Emily, MN who has a wolf for a pet...wow...they are huge. It is a big timber and makes my 85 pound black lab look like a pup. I would definately not want to have one after me. Wolves are a predator and do have a place, but humans in the woods need to be aware of them and the possibilites and protect as needed. As for delisting, this is a good thing b/c wolves should be managed on a state by state basis not be gov't in washington. Good discussions guys, and sure is a huge variety of opinion on the subject. But in the end, lets remember we are all on this site b/c we are hunters...and hunters need to stick together!

Ethologist call it habituation I think...and it's our fault, not the wild animals. I have "looked into the eyes" of wild wolves more times than I can count...awe inspiring-yes; spine chilling-not in the least.

Yes...documented cases. Science is funny like that...things need to be able to be proven. I did take a look at some articles from google (non of which would be accepted in the world of wildlife management thankfully) and the ones that "appeared" to be somewhat credible put the number of attacks anywhere from the low 20's to about 80 in the higher ones (most of these "attacks" being wolves shot while looking at the "victim") in north america since the 1800's. Lets crunch the numbers shall we.

For your sake-I'll use conservative estimates. pop. of wolves in alaska and canada=about 60,000. pop in lower 48=about 7000. current total=67000. life span is about 10 years on average. So lets assume that population level for the last 150 years (it was obviously much higher during this time). That means 1,005,000 wolves in North America in the last 150 years. Even your most radical articles put the number of attacks at 80 in that time frame.

Not a very accurate model, but it should give you an idea. 1 wolf attack for every 12,500 wolves...1 attack every 2 years throughout NORTH AMERICA. Deer cause more DEATHS a year than there are wolf attacks in a 100 years. More people have been trampled by bison than attacked by wolves. More people have died from west nile virus than wolf attacks. And keep in mind that those wolf attack numbers are coming from people that may have less knowledge on the situation than even you do.

I don't really expect any of this to change your opinion...I guess the only positive I can take from this is that future legeslation will be based on research by my peers and I...not articles you find on google.

I really don't want to get into a pissing match with you...and it seems like it's headed that way. I'm going to go back to thinking about bowhunting and not about changing your mind on these awesome creatures. Best of luck in the 09 season-that is why we're all here anyway.

I think we can all agree to disagree and yet be civil to eachother, that's the cool thing about living in America, we are free to state our opinions, right or wrong. One thing I think we all agree on is that wolf numbers need to be kept in check, the exact numbers are what is really at debate..........I want to say that if I was harsh with anyone on this thread or any others, I appologize it is not my intent to make enemies on any of the forums I visit, but to simply state my opinions and ideas, right or wrong, I am willing to bet that anyone I were to meet in person from any of these forums I would get along with, because after all we are all brothers and sisters of the blood!

Shoot straight!

Chris

I learned more from you and Bemidji on wolves in this discussion than I ever knew. Bemidji you really put me to the test and made me dig in and do some research. I don't want you to think I am looking for a pissing match. If that is your impression..(i'm sorry). I had a pre-concieved idea about the wolf and I really did learn something, imagine that.

I get kinda carried away some-times but We really are on the same side.

GOOD DISCUSSION GUY'S!

well put lungbuster...happy hunting to both of you

I think one thing that frustrates many of us is the lack of creditability that the Department of Natural Resources have. Many of us simply do not believe anything they tell us anymore. As my Dad told me when I was young... "Never lie to a man. For once he knows your a liar, he had no reason to ever believe or trustyou again." I guess that does not apply to government agencies???

We know the DNR does not lie. They count the wolves and estimate their numbers and tell us there are not many of them in our area. Probably just like they count the deer herd. But wait, that deer herd thing... was a simple mistake, the wrong formula was used. So all forgiven for the mistake.. right?? . Mistake to them means caught in a lie. They claimed mountain lions were not in Northern Wisconsin even thoughthere have been sightings all over the place. Nope.. no lions in Wisconsin. That is until one was caught on a game camera a little south of Superior and the picture was on the news. Opps!! Well then they admitted, that there might be one... why can't they just tell the truth.

A woman I know swears she saw a wolf watching her grandchildren while they wereall outside in the yard. She livesin the country and had no reason to lie. She even started the conversation with me. All the wolf was doing was sitting on a hill side watching her grand babies laying on a blanket in the yard getting some sun and fresh air. She was outside watching the babies. She observed the wolf and took the kids inside. She called the DNR and reported it and was told to keep her kids in the house for a while. I would have told her something very different to do to solve her problem. When she took them out after that, she took a shotgun. But as any warden will tell you.. if you shoot a bear (I never asked about a wolf) there better be gun powder burns on the fur. Meaning it better be attacking you. What if it is attacking something or someoneelse?

But an interesting point.. what if her grand kids were say four years oldand playing by themselves semi supervised (Mom used to watch us out the window when we were kids, while she did her house work...as we all have done with kids).Do you think that wolf would have just sat on that hill and watched? Of course he'd pass on a easy meal. Unless he was old or sick. And then that does not count... right?

Another person who has free ranging ducks and geese in their yard watched a wolf take a goose out of the yard. They called the DNR and was told by the person on the phone, they were sure,it was a coyote not a wolf. So they said, fine, we will shoot the coyote. And their reply was.. "You better not shoot a wolf !!!" Now who was not so sure of the species?

I had a friend that was bow hunting. On his way walking out, he saw two wolves shadowing him. He had a bow. He swears the wolves watched him pack up. And he was chased by the wolves, whileon his four wheeler as he was driving out. They ran along side him and a little behind him. Was he lying? Were the wolves just curious? Playing? Or did he run his wheeler off the road into the mud taking a curve too fast, and climb a tree and call us from his cell phone because he was acting like a squirrel? I hate to tell you what I might have done in that case.

The DNR claims they never brought the wolves to Wisconsin. Again, I do not believe that statement. The DNR told me they were not letting problem bears loose near my house. They assurred me that the bear are released deep in the nationalforest and musthave worked their way to my yard. Then I find them turning a bear loose with an ear tag not a mile from my house. Honesty!!

I can not prove wolves just wandered into Wisconsin. I think this line the DNR tells is untrue. I do not believe them. Creditability issues again. The wolves just all of a sudden showed up in different areas and in pack numbers. We were told to keep our dogs out of certain areas as the wolves would kill them. Harmless wolves we were told. Maybe dogs don't count??

And I went to the meetings where the DNR biologists tried to sell the wolves in our areato the locals. The wolves are harmless, more scared of you then you are of them (why do they say that? I am not scared of them. I am armed). No danger. Again, I knew they were not telling the truth because their lips were moving. And yet when someone is attacked by a bear, wolf, or any wild animal...the first thing out of the DNR's mouth is.. the animal was old, or diseased, or some other excuse. HELLO... animals get old, they get sick. So doesthat gives them an excuse thento attack humans? And the number of wolf attacks on humans is basically non existent. Well in my world then.. how many attacks then are allow? What if a child was attacked?By an old sick wolf. So that's OK??.. tell the parent ofthat child that it only happens once in a great while. See what they tell you.

And wolves donot kill indiscriminately? I talked to loggers who were cutting back in the national. The deer that winter turned their site into a deer yard because it was packed down and each night the deer moved in and cleaned up all the browse from their logging. Then the men come to work and find eight dead deer. Most of the deer, mauled with parts tore open and parts eaten.Deer parts all over the place as it was described to me.The DNRcame out and confirmed, yes wolves did this. But the wolves did not return for the rest of theslaughtered deer carcasses. And the DNR's reason... your (meaning the loggers) activities must have scared them off. But this was not indiscriminate killing because it was the humans fault? The Wolves killed and ate their fill, them moved off. They left a lot of meat in the woods at that site. But suddenly because being scared of the loggers, that's why they never came back.

I am not advocating the killing of wolves. Believe me I am not. In fact one book I read on the subject by Farley Mowatt "Never Cry Wolf" was very interesting and awakening (and an excellent read)to the plight of the wolves. And while the number of deer they kill might not impact the over all population of the deer herd, I can tell you when the wolves move into an area, the deer move out of that area.I can also tell you if I am in the woods and I feel threatened by wolves, I will deal with it, and then the DNR will have to prove it was me that did it.

Was the northern woods all that bad before the wolves showed up? What's next? We have elk, wolves, timber rattlesnakes (you better pray I never see one of them), an occassional moose, turkey, and NO DEER.

cayugad;

I couldn't agree with you more! I did learn alot by reading the web sites I listed in the above posts. If anyone reads the articals I mentioned they will understand what you are talking about the miss-trust of the DNR's Wildlife biologists. If they would just tell people the truth and not treat every-one like they just fell off the pumpkin truck. People will make their own decision on the wolf, so just tell them the trueth from the get go. In the articals I read , one of the reasons for wolf attacks humans,is they don't fear humans any more. People are shrinking the wolfs territory and more contact means less fear. As I said above in a post if anyone comes in contact witha wolf as I did, you will see why I don't trust them. They will case you out and their eye's just go right through you. Is it their fault? No, but the DNR biologists could help the situation by informing people and not down playing the situation. Let the people make their own decision! We as sportsmen need to stick together even if we disagree on some things. We have the right to "AGREE TO DISAGREE" as lungbuster said.