Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Dealing with 2- and 4-legged predators

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Dave Workman, Oct 8, 2012.

  1. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    2,387
    Washington Fish & Wildlife Director Phil Anderson and his troops made the right call on dealing with wolves in The Wedge, and in the process, his agency just might have given society a hint on how to deal with predators.

    There

    ;)

    Draw your own conclusions. The state just blasted a whole pack of wolves for preying on cattle.

    Predators of the 2-legged variety ought to take a hint....
     
    Grunwald, pokerace, shockme and 9 others like this.
  2. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754
     
  3. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    Oh sweet, shoot first and then hope you got the right one! That's a phenomenal way to operate.

    What is it about wolves that makes betas so wildly fearful? What is it that wolves have (other than lines of tshirts) that scares betas far more than cougars, coyotes, and bears?
     
    Grunwald and (deleted member) like this.
  4. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754


    Wolves killing lambs in Baker



    Link

    By Mark Furman KVAL.com Staff BAKER CITY, Ore. — Wolf experts confirmed wolves killed 19 lambs on an Eastern Oregon ranch in the Keating Valley.

    Michelle Dennehy with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife said experts with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have confirmed the lambs were killed by wolfs. A remote camera captured this scene of the wolves.

    It's the first documented case of a rancher losing livestock to wolves in Oregon since the animals returned to the state.

    Curt Jacobs (above) said the lambs on his ranch were killed, not eaten. (Photo courtesy S. John Collins/Baker City Herald)
    Russ Morgan, the department's wolf coordinator, says paw tracks shaped like those of a canine were found on the ranch, too big to belong to a coyote but not quite so large as some wolf tracks found in a nearby forest.

    Rancher Curt Jacobs told the Baker City Herald newspaper most of the lambs were killed but not eaten.

    The last reported bounty on a wolf in Oregon was paid in 1946 for a wolf killed on the Umpqua National Forest, Dennehy said.

    Last July, wildlife officials confirmed the existence of a wolf pack with pups in a forested area of northern Union County, north of where the lamb were killed place. This was the first evidence of a wolf pack and wolf reproduction in Oregon, Dennehy said. A collared wolf was detected in the state in January 2008.

    Wolves started returning to Oregon from packs in Idaho in 1999, when a wolf dubbed B-45 crossed the Snake River into Baker County.

    In May 2000, a wolf was found dead on Interstate 84 east of Baker City. The wolf had been hit by traffic. Later that year, an uncollared wolf was found shot to death near Ukiah, east of Baker City.

    Wolves remain on the federal endangered species list but are scheduled to be de-listed in the eastern third of Oregon on May 4.

    Wolf experience on Vancouver Island holds harsh lesson - Seattle gun rights | Examiner.com


    NOTE wolf attacK fatality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/home/news/pdfs/wolfattackfatality.pdf
     
    Redcap and (deleted member) like this.
  5. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    You claim a problem with wolves, I just see the cost of doing business, and the government trying to prevent ranchers from having the trials normal businesses do.

    So bears and coyotes and cougars have never predated on ranch animals or humans?
    List of Mountain Lion Attacks On People in California
    Hiker killed by coyotes in Canada - Telegraph
    List of fatal bear attacks in North America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Again, why the fatwah against wolves, but not these other, far more dangerous ones?

    One wolf fatality, big deal. How many pit bull human fatalities have there been in the last 100 years versus wolf human fatalities? Poor Candice, but one confirmed kill is not a reason to exterminate a species like a bunch of retarded Daleks.
     
  6. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754
    I see that you have twice used the usual liberal mode of change the subject and calling NAMES and dising others!!!!
     
  7. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    hahahahahaha. Thanks for your useful contribution.
     
  8. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754


    What does this post have to do with wolves????


    P>S> You forgot about the Mt.goat attack in Washington..
     
  9. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    It outlines the ignorant knee jerk overreaction to the claims of ranchers that are only marginally provable, and their successful use of the government as a tool to protect their profits through what is basically market control, and that people are falling all over themselves to clap people on the back for it.

    Simply put though, why is it ok to exterminate all wolves, like a bunch of ignorant tools, when there are three other apex predators that are causing the same problems, but actually pose a real threat to people. Those animals are getting a pass, and major protections from the F&W.

    It's a ridiculous situation. Also, why is it right for the F&W to "blast the pack", when they could have easily generated some extra cash by selling wolf hunt tags, and letting hunters do it?

    So lets see, market control, using ignorance to determine goverment controls, and an avoidance of revenue generation. Sweet.

    GOOD JOB Fish and Wildlife.
     
  10. Bigfoot

    Bigfoot Clack Co. OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,130
    Likes Received:
    560
    DFTT
     
  11. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    I should know better, but I seem to be doing that this morning.
     
  12. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754
    Livestock Loss Investigations




    Domestic animals can die for a variety of reasons—due to predators (wolf, cougar, coyote or bear), weather, disease or injury. ODFW carefully investigates all reported livestock losses to wolves to determine the cause of death and the appropriate response.

    First, ODFW closely examines evidence (the domestic animal’s carcass, signs of struggle, tracks or scat) to determine if the domestic animal was actually killed or injured by a predator—and not just scavenged by one after dying from another cause.

    If the death or injury is determined to be predator-caused, further examination of the carcass and other evidence is needed to determine if wolves (rather than cougars, bears, coyotes) were responsible. Radio-collar data, any eyewitness accounts and wolf sign such as tracks or scat can help indicate if wolves were in the area at the time.

    ODFW uses the same criteria as USDA Wildlife Services to classify the findings of wolf-livestock loss investigations. In some cases, livestock losses cannot be confirmed to be caused by wolves because there is not enough evidence. In others, an investigation finds the domestic animal died by an entirely different cause. More detail on the classifications used is below.

    For information on how ODFW responds to a confirmed livestock loss to a wolf, see Chapter 3 of the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan


    Investigation Report Summaries (pdfs)

    2012 | 2011



    2012




    September
    •9/28 Wallowa County
    •9/14 Wallowa County
    •9/14 Wallowa County
    •9/13 Wallowa County
    •9/11 Union County
    •9/11 Wallowa County
    •9/3 Wallowa County

    August
    •8/31 Baker County
    •8/29 Wallowa County
    •8/20 Baker County
    •8/14 Umatilla County
    •8/6 Wallowa County
    •8/5 Wallowa County

    July
    •7/26 Wallowa County
    •7/01 Wallowa County




    May
    •5/31 Wallowa County
    •5/27 Umatilla County
    •5/24 Wallowa County
    •5/12 Umatilla County
    •5/02 Umatilla County


    March
    •3/08 Wallowa County

    February
    •2/26 Baker County


    January
    •1/14 Wallowa County
    •1/10 Wallowa County (cow)
    •1/10 Wallowa County (bull)
    •1/07 Wallowa County








    CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION OF REPORTED DEPREDATION INCIDENTS

    Reported wolf incidents should be classified as either confirmed, probable, possible/unknown, or other, based on the following criteria.

    CONFIRMED – Depredation is confirmed in those cases where there is reasonable physical evidence that an animal was actually attacked and/or killed by a predator. The primary confirmation factor would ordinarily be the presence of bite marks and associated subcutaneous hemorrhaging and tissue damage, indicating that the attack occurred while the victim was alive, as opposed to simply feeding on an already dead animal. Spacing between canine tooth punctures, feeding pattern on the carcass, fresh tracks, scat, hairs rubbed off on fences or brush, and/or eye witness accounts of the attack may help identify the specific species or individual responsible for the depredation. Predation might also be confirmed in the absence of bite marks and associated hemorrhaging (i.e., if much of the carcass has already been consumed by the predator or scavengers) if there is other physical evidence to confirm predation on the live animal. This might include blood spilled or sprayed at a nearby attack site or other evidence of an attack or struggle. There may also be nearby remains of other victims for which there is still sufficient evidence to confirm predation, allowing reasonable inference of confirmed predation on the animal that has been largely consumed.

    PROBABLE – Having some evidence to suggest possible predation, but lacking sufficient evidence to clearly confirm predation by a particular species, a kill may be classified as probable depending on a number of other factors such as: (1) Has there been any recently confirmed predation by the suspected depredating species in the same or nearby area? (2) How recently had the livestock owner or his employees observed the livestock? (3) Is there evidence (telemetry monitoring data, sightings, howling, fresh tracks, etc.) to suggest that the suspected depredating species may have been in the area when the depredation occurred? All of these factors, and possibly others, should be considered in the investigator’s best professional judgment.

    POSSIBLE/UNKNOWN – Lacking sufficient evidence to classify an incident as either confirmed or probable predation, the possible/unknown classification is appropriate if it is unclear what the cause of death may have been. The investigator may or may not have much of a carcass remaining for inspection, or the carcass may have deteriorated so as to be of no use. The investigator would want to consider if the area has been frequented by a predator, or if the habitat is one which the predator is likely to use. Possible predation may include cases where counts show that abnormal numbers of livestock are missing or have disappeared above and beyond past experience, and where other known cases of predation have occurred previously in the area.
    OTHER – Cause of livestock deaths should be classified as other when it is discovered that the cause of death was not likely caused by the animal originally reported to Wildlife Services during a request for assistance. Examples of other may include cases where the cause of death is confirmed or is likely due to predation by some other animal or cause determined at the time of the investigation such as red fox instead of coyote or other causes such as, bloat, poisonous plants, stillborn, disease, lightning strike, vehicle collision, etc.









    Livestock Loss Investigations




    Domestic animals can die for a variety of reasons—due to predators (wolf, cougar, coyote or bear), weather, disease or injury. ODFW carefully investigates all reported livestock losses to wolves to determine the cause of death and the appropriate response.

    First, ODFW closely examines evidence (the domestic animal’s carcass, signs of struggle, tracks or scat) to determine if the domestic animal was actually killed or injured by a predator—and not just scavenged by one after dying from another cause.

    If the death or injury is determined to be predator-caused, further examination of the carcass and other evidence is needed to determine if wolves (rather than cougars, bears, coyotes) were responsible. Radio-collar data, any eyewitness accounts and wolf sign such as tracks or scat can help indicate if wolves were in the area at the time.

    ODFW uses the same criteria as USDA Wildlife Services to classify the findings of wolf-livestock loss investigations. In some cases, livestock losses cannot be confirmed to be caused by wolves because there is not enough evidence. In others, an investigation finds the domestic animal died by an entirely different cause. More detail on the classifications used is below.

    For information on how ODFW responds to a confirmed livestock loss to a wolf, see Chapter 3 of the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan


    Investigation Report Summaries (pdfs)

    2012 | 2011



    2012




    September
    •9/28 Wallowa County
    •9/14 Wallowa County
    •9/14 Wallowa County
    •9/13 Wallowa County
    •9/11 Union County
    •9/11 Wallowa County
    •9/3 Wallowa County

    August
    •8/31 Baker County
    •8/29 Wallowa County
    •8/20 Baker County
    •8/14 Umatilla County
    •8/6 Wallowa County
    •8/5 Wallowa County

    July
    •7/26 Wallowa County
    •7/01 Wallowa County




    May
    •5/31 Wallowa County
    •5/27 Umatilla County
    •5/24 Wallowa County
    •5/12 Umatilla County
    •5/02 Umatilla County


    March
    •3/08 Wallowa County

    February
    •2/26 Baker County


    January
    •1/14 Wallowa County
    •1/10 Wallowa County (cow)
    •1/10 Wallowa County (bull)
    •1/07 Wallowa County








    CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION OF REPORTED DEPREDATION INCIDENTS

    Reported wolf incidents should be classified as either confirmed, probable, possible/unknown, or other, based on the following criteria.

    CONFIRMED – Depredation is confirmed in those cases where there is reasonable physical evidence that an animal was actually attacked and/or killed by a predator. The primary confirmation factor would ordinarily be the presence of bite marks and associated subcutaneous hemorrhaging and tissue damage, indicating that the attack occurred while the victim was alive, as opposed to simply feeding on an already dead animal. Spacing between canine tooth punctures, feeding pattern on the carcass, fresh tracks, scat, hairs rubbed off on fences or brush, and/or eye witness accounts of the attack may help identify the specific species or individual responsible for the depredation. Predation might also be confirmed in the absence of bite marks and associated hemorrhaging (i.e., if much of the carcass has already been consumed by the predator or scavengers) if there is other physical evidence to confirm predation on the live animal. This might include blood spilled or sprayed at a nearby attack site or other evidence of an attack or struggle. There may also be nearby remains of other victims for which there is still sufficient evidence to confirm predation, allowing reasonable inference of confirmed predation on the animal that has been largely consumed.

    PROBABLE – Having some evidence to suggest possible predation, but lacking sufficient evidence to clearly confirm predation by a particular species, a kill may be classified as probable depending on a number of other factors such as: (1) Has there been any recently confirmed predation by the suspected depredating species in the same or nearby area? (2) How recently had the livestock owner or his employees observed the livestock? (3) Is there evidence (telemetry monitoring data, sightings, howling, fresh tracks, etc.) to suggest that the suspected depredating species may have been in the area when the depredation occurred? All of these factors, and possibly others, should be considered in the investigator’s best professional judgment.

    POSSIBLE/UNKNOWN – Lacking sufficient evidence to classify an incident as either confirmed or probable predation, the possible/unknown classification is appropriate if it is unclear what the cause of death may have been. The investigator may or may not have much of a carcass remaining for inspection, or the carcass may have deteriorated so as to be of no use. The investigator would want to consider if the area has been frequented by a predator, or if the habitat is one which the predator is likely to use. Possible predation may include cases where counts show that abnormal numbers of livestock are missing or have disappeared above and beyond past experience, and where other known cases of predation have occurred previously in the area.
    OTHER – Cause of livestock deaths should be classified as other when it is discovered that the cause of death was not likely caused by the animal originally reported to Wildlife Services during a request for assistance. Examples of other may include cases where the cause of death is confirmed or is likely due to predation by some other animal or cause determined at the time of the investigation such as red fox instead of coyote or other causes such as, bloat, poisonous plants, stillborn, disease, lightning strike, vehicle collision, etc.










    Livestock Loss Investigations




    Domestic animals can die for a variety of reasons—due to predators (wolf, cougar, coyote or bear), weather, disease or injury. ODFW carefully investigates all reported livestock losses to wolves to determine the cause of death and the appropriate response.

    First, ODFW closely examines evidence (the domestic animal’s carcass, signs of struggle, tracks or scat) to determine if the domestic animal was actually killed or injured by a predator—and not just scavenged by one after dying from another cause.

    If the death or injury is determined to be predator-caused, further examination of the carcass and other evidence is needed to determine if wolves (rather than cougars, bears, coyotes) were responsible. Radio-collar data, any eyewitness accounts and wolf sign such as tracks or scat can help indicate if wolves were in the area at the time.

    ODFW uses the same criteria as USDA Wildlife Services to classify the findings of wolf-livestock loss investigations. In some cases, livestock losses cannot be confirmed to be caused by wolves because there is not enough evidence. In others, an investigation finds the domestic animal died by an entirely different cause. More detail on the classifications used is below.

    For information on how ODFW responds to a confirmed livestock loss to a wolf, see Chapter 3 of the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan


    Investigation Report Summaries (pdfs)

    2012 | 2011



    2012




    September
    •9/28 Wallowa County
    •9/14 Wallowa County
    •9/14 Wallowa County
    •9/13 Wallowa County
    •9/11 Union County
    •9/11 Wallowa County
    •9/3 Wallowa County

    August
    •8/31 Baker County
    •8/29 Wallowa County
    •8/20 Baker County
    •8/14 Umatilla County
    •8/6 Wallowa County
    •8/5 Wallowa County

    July
    •7/26 Wallowa County
    •7/01 Wallowa County




    May
    •5/31 Wallowa County
    •5/27 Umatilla County
    •5/24 Wallowa County
    •5/12 Umatilla County
    •5/02 Umatilla County


    March
    •3/08 Wallowa County

    February
    •2/26 Baker County


    January
    •1/14 Wallowa County
    •1/10 Wallowa County (cow)
    •1/10 Wallowa County (bull)
    •1/07 Wallowa County








    CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION OF REPORTED DEPREDATION INCIDENTS

    Reported wolf incidents should be classified as either confirmed, probable, possible/unknown, or other, based on the following criteria.

    CONFIRMED – Depredation is confirmed in those cases where there is reasonable physical evidence that an animal was actually attacked and/or killed by a predator. The primary confirmation factor would ordinarily be the presence of bite marks and associated subcutaneous hemorrhaging and tissue damage, indicating that the attack occurred while the victim was alive, as opposed to simply feeding on an already dead animal. Spacing between canine tooth punctures, feeding pattern on the carcass, fresh tracks, scat, hairs rubbed off on fences or brush, and/or eye witness accounts of the attack may help identify the specific species or individual responsible for the depredation. Predation might also be confirmed in the absence of bite marks and associated hemorrhaging (i.e., if much of the carcass has already been consumed by the predator or scavengers) if there is other physical evidence to confirm predation on the live animal. This might include blood spilled or sprayed at a nearby attack site or other evidence of an attack or struggle. There may also be nearby remains of other victims for which there is still sufficient evidence to confirm predation, allowing reasonable inference of confirmed predation on the animal that has been largely consumed.

    PROBABLE – Having some evidence to suggest possible predation, but lacking sufficient evidence to clearly confirm predation by a particular species, a kill may be classified as probable depending on a number of other factors such as: (1) Has there been any recently confirmed predation by the suspected depredating species in the same or nearby area? (2) How recently had the livestock owner or his employees observed the livestock? (3) Is there evidence (telemetry monitoring data, sightings, howling, fresh tracks, etc.) to suggest that the suspected depredating species may have been in the area when the depredation occurred? All of these factors, and possibly others, should be considered in the investigator’s best professional judgment.

    POSSIBLE/UNKNOWN – Lacking sufficient evidence to classify an incident as either confirmed or probable predation, the possible/unknown classification is appropriate if it is unclear what the cause of death may have been. The investigator may or may not have much of a carcass remaining for inspection, or the carcass may have deteriorated so as to be of no use. The investigator would want to consider if the area has been frequented by a predator, or if the habitat is one which the predator is likely to use. Possible predation may include cases where counts show that abnormal numbers of livestock are missing or have disappeared above and beyond past experience, and where other known cases of predation have occurred previously in the area.
    OTHER – Cause of livestock deaths should be classified as other when it is discovered that the cause of death was not likely caused by the animal originally reported to Wildlife Services during a request for assistance. Examples of other may include cases where the cause of death is confirmed or is likely due to predation by some other animal or cause determined at the time of the investigation such as red fox instead of coyote or other causes such as, bloat, poisonous plants, stillborn, disease, lightning strike, vehicle collision, etc.
     
  13. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    tl;dr. What's your commentary? I just saw other people's writing.
     
  14. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754
    that is all that's needed...........
     
  15. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    ok, so you don't have anything original to add? Ok, thanks.
     
  16. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754

    You sir have put wolves above human kind...therefore it is impossible to change your mind....this dissertation is at at an end.
     
  17. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    Your statement is invalidated by my comments in post #9.

    :thumbup:
     
  18. longcolt

    longcolt Zephyrhills, FL Active Member

    Messages:
    769
    Likes Received:
    110
    The wolves and ole Grizz were eradicated in most of the US for a reason. Its hard for the starbucks crowd to understand. Black bears and cougars were also hunted with dogs to keep their populations under control. You see the only way to hunt Cougars and Bears effectively is with dogs or baiting since they are active at night when regular hunting is not allowed.

    In many ways Wolves are much more dangerous since they like to kill for sport and will circle and kill liberal tree huggers at will. As their numbers increase and the deaths of hikers and other wildlife lovers increase the Urban metrosexuals will clamor for someone to protect them from these vicious beasts. And the cycle of ignorance continues.

    I remember the video of Cougars being shot out of trees and bears being killed over bait that were used to convince the Urban voters to outlaw hunting with dogs and baiting back many years ago. I only wish that the videos of wolves, bears, and cougars would be shown of them tracking down and eating little deer fawns and the elk calves as they wipe out the herds as they are doing in Montana and Idaho, soon WA and Oregon will be added to their killing fields. But this massacre appears to be acceptable to the anti-hunting groups that support the reintroduction of the Wolves and the now 25,000 black bears and 6,000+ Cougars that roam Oregon and are wiping out the Mule Deer and Elk herds. Interesting logic don't you think.

    Next they will want to recover dinosaur DNA and reintroduce them to the population. Just as dumb in my opinion.
    These are the same people that think taking guns away from society will eliminate the criminal element and person on person crime.
     
  19. davemata

    davemata Spokane, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Likes Received:
    410
    Lot of people at both extremes of the situation, ignorance from the tree huggers, ignorance from the folks ******* the ranchers and going along with their ignorant fears.

    Wolves and Grizz were eradicated for business, so those who fellated the ranchers could get a pat on the head. We're past that, no reason for that to continue. We could easily maintain populations of wolf and grizzly, and keep them at the levels for a healthy sport hunting industry to rise around them. That would be a win for everyone.

    Ranchers could learn to become better business people, and get to learn what competition is. Tree hugging tits get to have bears to go hug and get eaten by. (That's a tasty Treadwell) Most importantly, the people who pay to make sure these areas are free and open to all, the hunters, get the chance at two new trophy hunts. THAT trumps both the Ranchers who want government to protect their businesses, and the tree hugging idiots.

    As for why you people up here allowed bans of normal trapping methods, baiting, and dogs... I don't get it. Obviously, someone needs to come in and slap some common sense into people.
     
    Sabertooth and (deleted member) like this.
  20. Sabertooth

    Sabertooth Josephine County Active Member

    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    216
    Any one ever think about the natural balance of nature?? Over population of one animal will muck up the whole neighbor hood. Re-interducing a species requires slow intergation to maintain a balance. The F&G people should be the only agency to say how critters are hunted or captured. Our F&G people have done a good job over the years. No, I don't always like the rules but I follow them. Its when the non-hunters get involved that things get really messed up and stupid.