Posted on 07/29/2008 1:07:52 PM PDT by jazusamo
TWISP — Everyone agrees, gray wolves are generally wary of humans.
But with the state's first pair of breeding wolves and six of their pups roaming the foothills near Twisp, people are asking:
"Just how wary should we be of them?"
|
The answer is mixed, depending on whom you ask.
"You're more likely to get attacked by someone's dog while you're hiking on a trail than you are to have a threatening contact with a wolf," said Derrick Knowles, outreach coordinator for the environmental group Conservation Northwest. "When you look at the real threats that are out there, wolves are way, way down on the totem pole," he said.
Jack Field doesn't see it that way.
"There's a reason wolves were extirpated in the '30s," said Field, executive vice president for the Washington State Cattlemen's Association.
Both Field and Knowles sit on Washington's Wolf Working Group, which has spent the last year and a half looking into the habits of wolves and coming up with a draft plan for how to manage and recover the endangered animal.
"That was something that was so frustrating in developing the draft plan," Field said. "We kept hearing that wolves don't attack people. But it sounds like there's a confirmed (fatality attack) in Canada, and a number of quote, unquote, close calls in Alaska," he said.
So, who's right?
Both are, according to Howard Golden, a wildlife biologist with a specialty in research of fur-bearing animals who works for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Wolves were never hunted to the point of extinction in Alaska, and between 7,700 and 11,200 of the 100-pound canines thrive there today.
"Certainly, over the years, there have been interactions that weren't positive for people," Golden said. "That said, it's pretty remarkable how few encounters there are, considering how abundant they are. We haven't had many issues with them compared with bears."
Golden said Mark McNay, a recently retired research biologist for his agency, studied the issue after a wolf attacked a 6-year-old boy near Icy Bay, Alaska, in 2000. Golden said McNay's conclusions are accepted and well-respected by other biologists in Alaska.
McNay's paper, "A Case History of Wolf-Human Encounters in Alaska and Canada," challenges the assumption that healthy wolves in North America pose little threat to humans.
|
He compiled the cases of 80 wolf-human encounters in Alaska and Canada. The stories range from a wolf that bit a 12-year-old boy in the face to packs of wolves approaching campers in their tents and chewing on their belongings after the animals had been fed leftovers.
He also points out that there were no human deaths attributed to wild, healthy wolves since at least 1900.
The report was published in 2002.
Three years later, authorities say, Canada had its first documented wolf death in more than a century.
Kenton Carnegie, a 22-year-old Ontario man who went for a walk in remote Saskatchewan in November 2005, was followed and killed by a pack of wolves, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported. Tracks in the snow provided evidence of a struggle and unsuccessful attempts by the man to flee, according to the news reports. A coroner's jury decided that wolves killed the man after hearing witnesses and experts and reviewing evidence.
Dr. Valerius Geist, an emeritus professor at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada, helped investigate Carnegie's death for his family.
He said it's dangerous to believe that wolves are harmless, although they are quite shy in most cases.
Geist agreed that wolf attacks are rare and fatalities even rarer. But the scene quickly changes if wolves don't have plentiful game or livestock to feed on, and if people don't have firearms to protect themselves, he said.
Geist said North American wildlife biologists have ignored centuries of evidence from Europe and Asia that indicate wolves sometimes prey on people.
"As long as there is big game, and as long as there are livestock, wolves are not a threat," he said. "They're extremely efficient as a predator. They literally vacuum out an area, and when they have no more wildlife, they turn to livestock, and then the pets and children and people that are with the livestock."
But wildlife biologists in Alaska say wolves are much more likely to go after your dog than your child.
"It's possible for wolves to take small kids, but I don't think it's ever happened in Alaska," Golden said.
"Wolves can be a threat. They have sharp, pointy teeth and can be a potentially dangerous animal, just like a dog can," said Jessy Coltrane, wildlife biologist for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in Anchorage.
But they're much more likely to go after a pet dog or cat than they are to threaten a person — even a child, she said.
Last winter, Anchorage had some trouble with two wolf packs that frequent the outskirts of the city. Biologists believe a lack of snow made for difficult moose-hunting conditions, because the moose were able to get about much more easily. They have a much harder time getting through the snow than wolves. So the wolves improvised, and started stalking people who were out walking their dogs.
Three women walking three dogs on leashes felt threatened by the wolves, which would not retreat until the women used pepper spray on them, Coltrane said. "Normally, the problem we have is wolves eating dogs that are chained up," she added.
She advised anyone who fears coming across a wolf to carry pepper spray.
In Washington, where wolves are only beginning to repopulate after they were virtually hunted and trapped out, the state Department of Fish and Wildlife offers much information about the animals, including phone numbers to call with sightings, how ranchers should treat a scene if they suspect their livestock was killed by a wolf, and what people should do if they come across a dead or injured wolf.
There's no mention of what to do if encountering an aggressive wolf.
"We don't feel the need at this point to have an explanation on human safety," said Rocky Beach, manager of wildlife diversity for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
He said as with encounters with all wildlife, people should use common sense and be cautious.
But in the overall scheme of wolf recovery, he said, "One of the more minor challenges is that in terms of human safety."
You shoot it.
Wolves aren’t that big a problem here because of the bears.
Yes, I suppose fatal maulings wouldn't be considered "positive."
With the reintroduction of the gray wolf in WY, MT and ID and them being federally protected their numbers have grown faster than anticipated.
Now they have been found in northern WA and OR so it looks as thought in a few years they will be established in the entire Northwest. Of course the enviros are tickled to death but ranchers are less than thrilled.
It’s something that hikers, fisherman and campers are going to have to be aware of but the biggest impact will undoubtedly be on livestock.
Wolf Ping!
I hate it when they chew on my belongings.
Once again, I will invoke Mark Twain's definition of "expert" as, "just some guy from out of town."
I'm sorry but this is willful ignorance on display. If you change the subject to 'dogs' there are many instances of the family pet suddenly & without provocation attacking a toddler. Dog behaviorists will often site the toddler's actions as exhibiting 'Prey Behavior', that triggers an almost automated aggressive response from the canine. We have a lot more data points with dogs, so I think it would be prudent to extrapolate from that data than the small pool of data involving reported wolf encounters.
Yes, people that venture into areas that wolves are establishing themselves in had better be armed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUIdncEp6jc&feature=related
This song seemed made for the thread.
If we were talking about cases of heat exhaustion, devotees of global warming would call these facts "strong indicators of a definite trend," and repeatedly cite them to bolster their argument.
Funny you should post that. As I was browsing this thread, I was humming Prokofiev’s “Peter and the Wolf” the whole time. ;)
LOL flycatcher.
The thing is I don’t want them going after either and if there are no wolves there’s no problem. Our wildlife in the Northwest has gotten along fine without wolves for the better part of a century.
She advised anyone who fears coming across a wolf to carry pepper spray.
What is the effective range of pepper spray? Seriously, if a "shy" wolf, or a pack of "shy" wolves are close enough to hit with pepper spray, they have a good chance of taking you down.
I love wolves in theory. Awesome animals, awesome predators. But wolves are dangerous creatures that humans should be wary of, just as wolves should be wary of humans. When either side loses that wariness, the one with the biggest set of weapons wins.
Teeth, claws, and natural instincts on how to take down prey versus pepper spray? Not a fight I would want to be in on.
Bump to that! :-)
Shoot! In some places now they’ll write you up if you tie your DOG outside too long for some busy-body’s liking!
Agreed...Pepper spray is no substitute for a firearm and an encounter like that is one you don’t want to come out in second place.
The definition of expert has been refined. It is now: Some guy from out of town who agrees with you.
I would advise the 3 ladies to invest in a Mastiff, Rhodesian Ridgeback, or a Borzoi (Russian Wolfhound). If they were walking a brace of these dogs, no wolfpack in it right (collective) mind would approach.
The bad news is that they killed six. Last week.
I rather like wolves, myself, but let's not pretend that they're anything other than what they are - large, highly intelligent pack predators. They're not fuzzy puppies, they're not Akela, and they didn't suckle Romulus and Remus. If you choose to live among predators the only intelligent thing to do is to be able to convince them that you're not food. It doesn't mean you have to kill them, but if you're not able to, be advised that they are able to kill you.
That pic reminds me of our son when he was about three. In about 1970 we camped at a small lake in OR and the campsite was very close to the water. We had a harness very similar to that with about a 15 foot rope to keep him from falling in the lake.
An elderly couple walking by thought it was just terrible but it wasn’t like we just abandoned him there, we were right there with him. We just didn’t want to take the chance of looking away or being distracted long enough for him to fall in.
Pepperspray is for the Mailman to deter the neighborhood yappy dog when he comes in for a ‘taste’. It likely wouldn’t do anything against a coordinated attack. A buck might get his antlers on one, but the other wolf is surely gonna hamstring him while the third takes him down by the throat. The report of a firearm might disrupt the attack while knocking down the wolf that’s got your attention.
That’s a shame about those Walkers, they’re great hounds.
Yes, in the areas that are far out from civilization predators learn quick that man is not their friend. In Eastern OR I have a cousin who lives in such a place and we’ve hunted deer for many years there. Cayotes, bears and cougars give a wide berth to the few ranch houses, they have a fear of man.
Criminy I hope you guys don't live anywhere near Burns, Ore in the East. That place is freakin Godforsaken.
It’s at least thirty miles from Burns and it’s not Godforsaken, it’s Gods country. Especially so if you like sage brush, juniper trees and rimrock. :-)
Mule deer hunting is great, we’ve gotten some real nice ones over the years. Many times I’ve hunted all day and never seen another human being, I guess you can tell I like it over there.
Predators typicall go for the weakest member of a herd.
Dog or child doesn’t matter to the predator. They just want food without working too hard to get it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.