Scientists Mourn Popular Wolf Shot By A Hunter

I'm kinda surprised this hasn't been posted yet, but....

here it is.
This makes me VERY SAD.
Scientists Mourn Popular Wolf Shot By A Hunter

The most popular wolf in Yellowstone National Park was shot by a hunter last week, a big blow to scientists and many wildlife enthusiasts who loved following her story.

"She was very recognizable, and she was unique and everybody knew her," says biologist Douglas Smith.

The animal known as 832F had a beautiful gray coat and was the alpha female of the Lamar Canyon pack. Smith has followed this wolf for years but only got to put a tracking collar on her in February.

"I tried to catch her for several years prior to doing it, and she was so smart we couldn't. We do it with a helicopter, we dart them, we fly in on them. And she used the landscape to her advantage," Smith says. "I watched her. And every other wolf is running, she's watching, figuring out the next move to get away from us."

This wolf had been the subject of fascination for years.

'A Level Of Tolerance'

Wolves were only taken off the endangered species list in Wyoming a few months ago, and this is the first season it's been legal to hunt wolves in all three states bordering Yellowstone.

Wolf 832, who was taking a rare jaunt outside park boundaries when she was shot, is one of at least seven wolves from Yellowstone that have been killed in legal hunts this year. Hundreds more out of about 1,800 in the northern Rockies have also been killed.

Suzanne Stone, a wolf expert from the environmental group Defenders of Wildlife, says the hunting is too aggressive.

The story goes on to say that the people who feel wolves are "vermin" must be accommodated (!), so that the wolves will be accepted.

Randy Newberg hunts wolves and makes hunting television programs. He says tourists love wolves, but many people who live around them don't like them and hate that the federal government forced wolves on them. He thinks wolf hunts are easing the animosity many local people feel toward the predator.

Do you all have any opinions about this??

Originally posted by wildtimes
Do you all have any opinions about this??

edit on 12-12-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

Yes:
1. If it hasn't threatened your life, don't shoot it.
2. If you don't intend to eat it, don't shoot it.

I don't necessarily mean at the same time.


Oh and I forgot to add that when I spend some time in Montana earlier this year, I learned that a good many bears and wolves are illegally killed by residents that view them as a nuisance, or potential threat to livestock. They have an unwritten "SSS" Shoot-shovel-shutup policy regarding bears and wolves.

I have a big question.
Why would it be ok to shoot a wolf that had a collar on? Would it not be obvious that that particular wolf is being studied and observed?

Very sad news.

reply to post by jasonl1983


This she-wolf had been a favorite of tourists and also this scientist. They learned a lot about how wolves behave that refuted (debunked, in ATS terms) earlier understandings about them.

The guy who shot her deserves "validity"? I really have a hard time with this notion. I'm hoping ATS can help me digest it.

Here she is:


www.travelerstoday.com...



Beautiful

Peace

reply to post by chiefsmom


The radio collar obviously didn't help this wolf any, that's why I would never advocate shooting a wolf or any other animal with a tranquilizer dart (which immediately puts the creature in harm's way, btw) for the purpose of tracking it. Do it the old fashioned way, if you truly love them.

reply to post by jude11


Uggh.....I'm nauseated.
Beautiful animal......

WHY do people have to do this stuff???

I'm going to let the thread do what it will...I'm too sad to continue.
No matter what you feel about me personally, ATS, I value you all being here to let me talk and vent.

Rest in Peace, sweet wolf.......

reply to post by jasonl1983


That's what I'm saying. Some guy is out to shoot a wolf. See's a wolf, but it has a collar on. Idiot man decides it's still ok to shoot the wolf. How dumb do you have to be to see a wolf, in the wild, with a collar, and not think there is something special about that wolf?

And he wants validation? Of what? That he is obviously an idiot? OK, I'll give him that.

She almost looks like a picture on my wallpaper.



So sad...

"Hundreds more out of about 1,800 in the northern Rockies have also been killed."

Hundreds out of less than 2,000 killed. Sounds to me like the hunting is too aggressive. I wonder who or what organizations is making the profits off these hunts.

I think its a shame the popular Yellowstone wolf was shot and killed on what the park officials say was a rare and brief excursion outside the park, however....

I live in rural Eastern Oregon, near one of the area's where the reintroduced wolf packs are very active.

As fate would have it, just as I was reading your post a rancher friend who free ranges her cattle stopped by and I brought the topic up with her. Her thoughts are identical to many who actually live in the areas with wolf populations.

My friend pointed out that they lost 16 cattle to predators this year, 8 calves at $800 and 8 cows at $1200. They are a small operation and $16,000 USD in lost revenue really effects their bottom line.

There is a government program in place to reimburse ranchers for lost revenue due to wolf predation but the bureaucracy is cumbersome and very slow to act.

Quite often the decisions on how to properly manage our natural resources are made by people thousands of miles away that don't have to live with the consequences of well meaning but unrealistic wildlife management decisions.

Wolves are amazing creatures but because they are so good at what they do and so well adapted to this geography it is a real challenge, maybe an impossible one, to manage wild wolf packs alongside civilization.

I think it's a real hard balancing act. They are re-introducing an apex predator species that, for all intents and purposes, is alien to the environment. Oh, it USED to be there....and WE know it used to be there...but to the wildlife? This thing was as extinct as the dinosaurs. Now it's back in a very different wild balance than it'd been in when last it's species knew that land.

Now it's eating people's livelihoods as free range buffets and that can't be tolerated. I'm really serious on that one too...not sarcastic. How much damage can be done to the ranchers before they are also living on welfare and food stamps and wouldn't that be the worst irony? A production farm ...a food producer...on food stamps. The predator population does need kept in check somehow because Man flat out destroyed the balance to the whole system before any of us were born. It's going to be a nasty business trying to rebuild it since Man has decided to Bio-Form once again and restore it all.

Having said that, if the attachment to this animal was that strong, why weren't people proactive about nudging it back into the boundaries of the park or were they and I missed it? Also....Were the locals aware of the high profile animals along the boundaries? I mean these are legal to hunt and condemn the law .....but I look at the pictures of the Wolf and I don't see a collar? Was there one that could be seen by a hunter after a fast moving animal like this?

reply to post by Drunkenparrot

Wolves are amazing creatures but because they are so good at what they do and so well adapted to this geography it is a real challenge, maybe an impossible one, to manage wild wolf packs alongside civilization.

I acknowledge and respect your position on this.

Thanks for posting. I have to think about this issue.

I have to think about what "civilization" is. There's more to my conflicted POV on this......
but, today, really, (I know I said it earlier), I have to let this issue "simmer down" in my mind.

Being from the area, wolf's are seen as a nuisance,
there are many issues with the wolf's.

For starters the guys at yellowstone did not count right
and ended up re introducing way more than the land would
sustain, so naturally they spread. What was a few wolf's quickly
turned into a den of many, which multiple's. its as bad as wild
dogs. They eat and bread and that is about it... there are many
bunches that are not counted.

This has huge effect on elk and deer population, just in the past
few years since they have removed them from the endangered list
the elk and deer population has drastically changed in this area.

Use to be you could head off to the woods and see thousands,
not a extradition, literally thousands of elk, now in the same areas
because of the wolves you are lucky if you see a bunch of a few hundred.

It has drastically changed the population of elk and deer, which since
there are no elk around, now instead its the ranchers cows that end up
as food for them.

I'm on the fence on this one.. sure its nice to bring them back, and have
them in the wild again, (unless you are out in the woods and run upon one,
which has happened a time or two) But it also drastically effects the wild life
that was here.

Hunting season has sucked the past 3 or 4 years, each year it gets harder
and harder to even see a elk to shoot, the past 2 years personally i have not
filled a elk tag.

As for the question earlier, no one makes money on these hunts, they are
standard hunts that you can buy a tag for, and the hunt is open until the
state set quota is met, then the season for them is closed.
I know of a few that have gone and tryed to get one. I myself thought about
getting a tag, but i dont want to eat dog, so i passed.

as for the 'dumb hunter' comment's, it all depends on the situation,
quite often with critters you only get a few seconds to classify, and
qualify the critter you are shooting at, at a glance you need to check
sex, (which is normally easy) and if say elk, the horns meet the requirements
for that specific region, some regions, you can shoot any bull with any horns,
some have to have browtine's, at a specific size, So while you are
checking the animal, you are also checking the background to make sure
you know where your bullet is going once it's exited the animal, to make
sure there is nothing behind there , be it another animal or building or
another hunter, or a parked truck, then you have to site it in and make sure
you get a good shot, (with me, if i cant drop the animal where it stands, i
wont take the shot. I dont want a wounded animal wondering the woods
because of a miss placed or bad shot.)

So you are doing all of this at once, in a matter of a half a second, or so
to be able to get the shot before the animal moves and takes off out of
range, now you add on top a collar... which is rare in the woods to look for,
not something you often see, and if the collar is dark color, or black and
the animal is dark or black, it would be that much harder to spot in that
amount of time.

Not that i am saying what the hunter did is right, but as for how the hunter
could of shot this wolf without seeing the collar is not as a 'stuipd' or
'dumb' thing to do considering all that you have to take into account
and think about in a split second decision to take the animal.

I am sure with a wolf as quick as they are, the hunter was doing all
he could to to through the requirements to take a shot, it would be
a fast check and shoot, otherwise they would of missed the shot..

I myself still doubt i would buy a tag and go hunt a wolf, although
on the other hand, i would love nothing more than to be able to
go hunt a buffalo, those tag's are hard to come by as well.
I'm still waiting for my moose tag, which are hard to get as well.

But those two would fill the freezer and be some yummy food for
a long time. Wolf on the other hand, i'm just not sure i could handle
eating, so i would pass hunting it, but i have no quams about someone
else shooting one, and would even help load if needed.

The problem is, they are legal to hunt, many dont like it,
but they are. So there will be the one's that do.

As for the previous poster about the 3 S's..
Yup, its montana, know of many stories of the 3 S's
its the old way of life, montana is not like the rest of the country
in many ways. Which is part of the reason i love living here..
its still a little wild west, things are much slower pace and
what some consider offensive, we consider daily life.

When it comes to it, if they really wanted to keep the wolf safe,
they should have kept it in Yellowstone... otherwise like it or not
its free game for anyone with a tag.

Originally posted by wildtimes

"She was very recognizable, and she was unique and everybody knew her," says biologist Douglas Smith.

The animal known as 832F.......

she was so dearly loved they assigned her a number instead of a name......

tell me, if an organization refers to you as "number 513E" does that make you feel loved?

BULL#

The populations of prey animals are completely out of balance, thanks to the original decimation of the wolf population. The other issue that it has caused is an explosion of the coyote population. Where there were wolves, there were no coyotes. When the wolf was knocked almost to extinction in the US, the coyote population exploded to fill the niche. Now we have coyotes at levels we've never seen before, and they are incredibly brazen. I've seen them standing on the side of the road watching me drive by, and not even blink as the truck went past them.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Coyotes have even been seen and been a problem in metro Detroit.
We're talking suburban streets. Not rural at all.
Taking small dogs from yards.

Kind of wish they'd get rid of the bumper bunny crop around here....


I can understand the ranchers on this.

But, if this guy was legally hunting that close to Yellowstone....and it beng a place where it is known wolves are being studied....he should have known better.
Very, very sad.....she was a beautiful animal....her mate must be lost without her. And the entire pack in upheaval.

Originally posted by chiefsmom
reply to post by jasonl1983

 

That's what I'm saying. Some guy is out to shoot a wolf. See's a wolf, but it has a collar on. Idiot man decides it's still ok to shoot the wolf. How dumb do you have to be to see a wolf, in the wild, with a collar, and not think there is something special about that wolf?

And he wants validation? Of what? That he is obviously an idiot? OK, I'll give him that.

I wouldn't shoot any wolf that wasn't threatening my life, ever, as I would never eat a wolf. I think you folks have misunderstood what I've been saying; that the death of this wolf is inexcusable, but not because some geek tranq'd it and put a collar on it, which I believe is dangerous for the wolf. The wolf isn't going to be food and it wasn't dangerous so there was no reason to shoot it. Killing living creatures is not a sport and any that views it as such is warped beyond description.

The wolves were bigtime in this land before the Europeans showed up. The polite thing to do would have been to respect the wolf's claim on the land and find ways to keep your animals safe. Humans destroyed the wolves and humans also brought cattle to this land, which wolf had never hunted here before. So we bring big, slow moving meat targets out and parade them in front of hungry wolves, who then are shot for their inability to resist temptation. It's like the undercover lady cop on the corner saying "Hey fella, wanna have some fun?" to passersby. Uh, entrapment anyone? It's all a mess, and everyone is suffering for what irresponsible people have done before us. We've really inherited one steaming pile in many respects, and I am embarrassed by the state of the Earth that I am handing off to the people coming after me.

reply to post by jasonl1983

You're over simplifying this. Yes, Man did hunt the wolves essentially to the brink of total extinction in North America. That was wrong to do. Believe me I know. There is a museum in Springfield at Bass Pro with photos of the great Buffalo stampedes and hunts with skulls stacked 3 STORIES high in huge mounds with people posing for scale. It's absolutely obscene and wrong at every level, how some life was literally determined unfit and nearly wiped out across a continent.

Having said that. Where I think it's far more complex is like others noted with the Coyote population and that is only one of any number of populations of animals in these areas anyone can point to. It's all blown totally out of balance. You can't just plop wolves back in like a sim-city game and expect them to re-integrate smoothly because the books say they should. They are breeding and the sims they did this on were wrong about the numbers. They're breeding a bit TOO much. THEY had predators at one time too....they don't anymore. See? Balance... It's blown at all levels.

If that runs too far out of control, you have an environment devoid of prey animals quickly enough to make the opposite problem the wolves were re-introduced to help solve ...while restoring their place at the same time. What you'll end up with though is starving wolf populations if left to play out to it's natural conclusion. Not by nature's way....but because we're only fixing one part of a very broken environmental balance and in isolation to the others.

This is why I hate Man screwing with nature with even the BEST of intentions. It never goes as planned when we cannot fully understand even the basic levels of the systems we screw with, IMO.