wolf pack poisoned, Union county

[ZigZagZeke]

LOL. Mike, I think you quoted the wrong Zeke post. My response was simply giving him a "thumbs up".

He's probably got the other guy on IGNORE by now.

Exactly.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

That is a big a$$ flat, open and exposed place for a wolf to be.

OTOH, my wife and I found a cow walking in the woods near Wapinitia!

That area has some rolling hills and a reservoir or two, but is basically flat wheat field. The wolf ran towards the largest reservoir in that area. It's surrounded by cottonwood trees and scrub juniper, so there's some cover near the reservoir. I did not investigate further because that whole 640 acre section is reserved for the grandkids to hunt on. I'm just a nephew by marriage.

 

[Bobbygun]

Is there any more general bow elk hunt areas in E. OR?

They changed the last general 'rifle' hunt to draw just a couple years ago. That was the High Cascade Elk Hunt and I live within one of the units. A friend killed a three pointer not far from me a few years back.

I just checked and ODFW has the 2022 regulations online. Looks like there are still several eastern units open to general tag holders. Not much in the way of units I've ever chased elk in, but I'm not averse to looking over some new country. If I don't draw my preferred unit, I'll probably buy the general tag and start from scratch.

 

[Mikej]

LOL. Mike, I think you quoted the wrong Zeke post. My response was simply giving him a "thumbs up".

He's probably got the other guy on IGNORE by now.

I did.
A shame, Zeke is very well spoken and frustrates the hell outa' the, other, guy.
I'm not that good. I refuse to feed them. That's all I've got.

 

[RVTECH]

Looks like there are still several eastern units open to general tag

You remember which units? I may have to look myself.

I used to bow hunt long ago but got out of it.

 

[Bobbygun]

You remember which units? I may have to look myself.

I used to bow hunt long ago but got out of it.

I'll try to cut and paste:

One elk Units 35, 38, 40-45, southern portion of Unit 51 (see pg 95 - S Sumpter), 64, eastern portion of 65 (see pg 96 - east Beulah), northern portion of 66 (see pg 96 - N Malheur Rvr), 67-71, 73, and that portion of Unit 77 east of Hwy 97.

One bull elk Units 31-34, 39, 74, 75, 76, and that portion of Unit 77 west of Hwy 97.

 

[RVTECH]

Still some good area. Probably still general as not many typically go that far East to bow hunt.

I used to hunt Starkey however but really liked the units in the Ochocos which were my go-to places.

 

[Bobbygun]

Still some good area. Probably still general as not many typically go that far East to bow hunt.

I used to hunt Starkey however but really liked the units in the Ochocos which were my go-to places.

I hunted both of those units and liked them both. Starkey started getting pretty crowded and Ochocos turned into a draw unit, so we moved further east and hunted Snake River, Imnaha, Keating, etc.

 

[Lennie]

MSN

 

[Cavedweller]

Never mind my and my extended family's experience with raising cattle, predator control, and hunting deer and elk in eastern Oregon since 1870. Never mind that I have been a logger, a farmer/rancher, a professional guide, and an outdoor sports business owner, or that I am college educated (where I wrote research papers) and attended law school.

"Yeah, well I've lived in lots of high rise apartment buildings in the downtown areas of several major cities, so there!"

ETA: "And I read a book about wolves once. Neener neener neener!"

"Oh, yeah, and that Nat Geo documentary..."

 

[bionic knees]

MSN

well isn't that special.

 

[arakboss]

Now the wolves are being blamed for eating a WA kid:

Siblings of missing Washington girl Oakley Carlson, 5, said sister was 'no more,' 'had been eaten by wolves'

The young siblings of missing Washington 5-year-old Oakley Carlson told investigators and a friend that their vanished sister – who was reportedly last seen over 10 months ago – is "no more," and had "gone out into the woods and had been eaten by wolves."

www.foxnews.com

 

[Bobbygun]

Now the wolves are being blamed for eating a WA kid:

Siblings of missing Washington girl Oakley Carlson, 5, said sister was 'no more,' 'had been eaten by wolves'

The young siblings of missing Washington 5-year-old Oakley Carlson told investigators and a friend that their vanished sister – who was reportedly last seen over 10 months ago – is "no more," and had "gone out into the woods and had been eaten by wolves."

www.foxnews.com

After reading the article, my money is not on wolves. It's on two-legged dogs. And that's an insult to dogs everywhere, so I apologize.

ETA: UGH!

 

[USMC1911]

After reading the article, my money is not on wolves. It's on two-legged dogs. And that's an insult to dogs everywhere, so I apologize.

ETA: UGH!

If I had to bet it was one or both of the zombies pictured.

 

[Koda]

MSN

in this clip they claim wolves are only sucessful 10% of the time when they hunt prey, is it true that wolves are only successful only 10% of the time they hunt prey?

(question open to everyone here)

MSN

 

[VanceInWA]

Coywolf hybrids are naturally occurring in the North and Northeast... maybe our smart azzhats import some of those.

Exactly. I really, really do not want to see that hybrid Coywolf making its way into the Pacific Northwest!

 

[VanceInWA]

Pretty sure I caught the culprit on my game cam

View attachment 1088325

No wonder all my childhood storybooks showed the big bad wolf drooling...

 

[VanceInWA]

Have you ever considered what that actually means? Peer reviewed, that is. Given the absurd level of insular behavior the academics have shown us over the last decade...do you really think a study being accepted by all of the same-minded people really has any credibility? Especially with the people that live/recreat in said "peer reviewed" environment studied?

Spot on, Joshp3. As we've seen so starkly the past two years, "objective" science is being progressively corrupted by politics. Just look at the now infamous Lancet publication, signed by 27 scientists, claiming it was virtually impossible for Covid to have come from the Wuhan lab. The Lancet, mind you, is supposed to be one of the world's leading peer-reviewed medical journals. Did that level of politically corrupted science happen in the case of the Yellowstone report vis-à-vis wolves? No idea, and it would be wrong to claim so without proof. But would I be surprised? Hell no...

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Spot on, Joshp3. As we've seen so starkly the past two years, "objective" science is being progressively corrupted by politics. Just look at the now infamous Lancet publication, signed by 27 scientists, claiming it was virtually impossible for Covid to have come from the Wuhan lab. The Lancet, mind you, is supposed to be one of the world's leading peer-reviewed medical journals. Did that level of politically corrupted science happen in the case of the Yellowstone report vis-à-vis wolves? No idea, and it would be wrong to claim so without proof. But would I be surprised? Hell no...

What peer reviewed means is "We voted on reality and this is our version."

"Collective Evolution discusses a recent commentary by Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, in which Horton states that "much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue."

"Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness," writes Horton.

"This is quite disturbing, given the fact that all of these studies (which are industry sponsored) are used to develop drugs/vaccines to supposedly help people, train medical staff, educate medical students and more," comments Arjun Walia on Collective Evolution. "It's common for many to dismiss a lot of great work by experts and researchers at various institutions around the globe which isn't 'peer-reviewed' and doesn't appear in a 'credible' medical journal, but as we can see, 'peer-reviewed' doesn't really mean much anymore."

Horton, Richard. "Offline: What Is Medicine's 5 Sigma?" The Lancet 385, no. 9976 (April 2015): 1380. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1. (Full text)"

Lancet Editor Proclaims Half of All Scientific Studies are False

Collective Evolution discusses a recent commentary by the editor of The Lancet stating that "much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue."

www.madinamerica.com

 

[Spitpatch]

in this clip they claim wolves are only sucessful 10% of the time when they hunt prey, is it true that wolves are only successful only 10% of the time they hunt prey?

(question open to everyone here)

MSN

The ten percent figure is frequently assigned to numerous predators. It is rather subjective, in what constitutes "every time they hunt prey". Since they are nearly always hunting, what is the criteria for an episode to measure?

It is true that most predators are largely unsuccessful in their attempts. Far more often than successful (and this would include humans).

In this instance, we must also consider the source: an employee of an "Eco Tour", with motivations toward preserving the business (and a job). Minimizing the untidy habits of Wolves is in that person's best interest, especially when minimizing is as easy as "quoting" the ten percent statistic read somewhere.

Watching this clip, did it seem early on as if the Wolves only had a ten percent chance of a score? Were their actions haphazard and random or more calculated and coordinated? Were they operating each to himself or within a plan with duty assignments that had previously paid off repeatedly? We must remind ourselves that we see only the CONCLUSION of the hunt. We are deprived of the strategy of positioning and the stalk prior to the chase.

If THIS sort of specific activity qualifies as "every time they hunt prey", I feel rather certain that this specific level of activity has a success rate measurably higher than ten percent.

Also, did that elk look like it was immature, sick or weak? Or did it become the "choice" simply as a result of its position (and a stumble) on the fringe of the herd where it could be isolated?

Regarding my experience with the Caribou, I believed the Wolves probably wouldn't be successful on the first animal. After having watched their methods, the second Caribou's fate was a foregone conclusion. Anecdotally measuring the Wolves' rate of success there puts them at 200 percent.