December 3, 2021

Hybrid Wolves Attack and Kill Mini-Horse on Ranch Near Riverside

Share

Coyote and Coyote Wolf Cross-Breeds Attack and Kill Moose

Abstract:

It has been widely assumed that coyotes (Canis latrans Say, 1823) are incapable of killing adult moose (Alces alces (L., 1758)) and previous studies of coyote predation support this assumption. However, eastern coyotes and eastern coyote × eastern wolf (Canis lycaon Schreber, 1775) are larger than western coyotes and appear to rely on larger prey in some areas. We used a combination of GPS telemetry, genetic analysis, and field investigation to test the hypothesis that eastern coyotes and coyote × wolf hybrids are capable of preying on adult moose in central Ontario. Our hypothesis was supported, as we documented four definitive cases of eastern coyotes and (or) eastern coyote × eastern wolf hybrids killing moose ?1.5 years old. Predation by coyotes and coyote × wolf hybrids probably does not represent a threat to moose population viability in central Ontario, but our results suggest that researchers and managers in other areas with declining moose populations that are sympatric with eastern coyotes and (or) coyote × wolf hybrids should consider coyote predation as a potential source of mortality.<<<Read the full Study>>>

Share

Researchers question possible “coyote type of wolf-dog hybrid” roaming around Wauwatosa

*Editor’s Comment* – Science (cough, cough) has shown that there exists some kind of mongrel mutt in many parts of the East and Northeast. What I’ve come to conclude in reading reports of “wild dog” sightings worldwide, is that many observers are delusional and wouldn’t know the difference between a wolf and a poodle (and this is actually one case in Europe.)

The take away from all this is that none of these wild dogs need protecting.

“It looks like a dog. It looks like a German Shepard,” said Falz.

Bob FalzOthers who live nearby say the coyote they’ve seen was rather majestic, more like a wolf.

Source: Researchers question possible “coyote type of wolf-dog hybrid” roaming around Wauwatosa | FOX6Now.com

Share

Defining Hybrids as Species is Political

*Editor’s Note* – For much the same reasons as the Ruling Establishment wants to outlaw opposing science that shows man-caused Climate Change is fake, politics will get us in a world of trouble by assigning specie designation to cross-bred wild and domestic canines.

In the article linked below, it clearly spells out that the purpose for wanting to assign a species to “hybrid” animals is so that they can be categorized for threatened or endangered animals – assuming that actually means for purposes of administering the Endangered Species Act. That’s where the money is.

Instead of dealing with the facts and reasons as to why we are seeing so much cross breeding among canines – an actual threat to species such as wolves and coyotes – evidently there must be more money in placing a label on a wild, mongrel dog and declaring it an endangered species.

“We infer from that pattern that a greater proportion of wolf DNA in any individual makes that individual more capable of exploiting that resource, in this case a whitetail deer,” Monzon said.

Genetic findings aside, Monzon agreed with Rutledge that defining hybrids as species is important for conservation. He said he expects more hybrids will be discovered as climate change shifts the ranges of different species, causing them to overlap.

Source: EMBARK: The eastern coyote quandary – LakePlacidNews.com | News and information on the Lake Placid and Essex County region of New York – Lake Placid News

Share

Wolf Perverts Will Call Anything Dog-Like a Wolf

*Editor’s Note* – The link below takes readers to an article that claims that someone has captured new “wolf cubs” on camera in Switzerland. Realizing the difficulty, usually, of identifying what is commonly referred to as “pure wolves” and the differences of mixed breeds, my first inclination was that this was a picture of mongrel dogs, perhaps representing a mixed German Shepard, not wolves.

I consulted with a wolf expert in Finland, expert in wolf DNA analysis and identification who said, “These guys are almost pure dogs, rather German Shepherds than wolves. Wolves do not exhibit this kind of color variations during their first year. Wolves’ first pelt is relatively monotone. When they shed their first winter pelt, the wolfish color settings become more expressed.”

The misled desire for people to want to see and have wolves to look at in the wild, have blinded them so badly, any wild dog is considered a wolf. Aside from the perversion that comes with wolf worship, the chosen blindness of the followers are contributing to the demise of actual wolves. Forcing mixed breed canines and actual wolves together, will lead only to further cross-breeding and a destruction of the species – even creating a cross-bred dog species that is more dangerous to people and to livestock.

What will it take to get people to understand?

Source: New wolves seen in Switzerland – SWI swissinfo.ch

Share

USFWS Lies, Cheats and Steals to Get Frankenwolf

*Editor’s Note* – Below is part 7 of a 7 part email series about the corruption and bastardized fake science concocted in order to create a mixed-breed wild mutt, call it a red wolf and manipulate the data in order to introduce their Frankenwolf into the forest. I find it all extremely perverted and disgusting.

Please read Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, and Part VI here.

How and Why USFWS Falsely Manipulated the Red Wolf’s Historic Range

Director Ashe,

On March 24th I presented you with this 1972 USFWS commissioned Red Wolf Range map:

RangeMapOriginal

Survey

Special Scientific Report–Wildlife No. 162
Washington, D. C. 1972

Introduction

Distribution

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015077581356;view=1up;seq=1

I then made the following Freedom Of Information Act request:

“Please provide specific and detailed evidence that the “red wolf” that was a “human construct” and was “selectively bred” in a zoo in Tacoma, Washington using hybridized coywolves from the State of Texas was ever present in the North Carolina counties of Dare, Hyde, Tyrrell, Washington, and Beaufort as explicitly stated and added in 9(i) of the 50 CFR Part 17 1995 Rules revisions for the red wolf program in NC.”

Your office promptly sent to me hundreds of pages of USFWS statements, Defenders of Wildlife statements, Ron Nowak statements, Ron Nowak dissertations, Ron Nowak maps, magazine articles, etc. It is humorous but problematic that I never received the only USFWS commissioned study and resulting range map as shown above. It is disturbing that private landowners were able to easily find this map, but your staff and your WMI consultants could not.

I spent a great deal of time reviewing each and every page that was sent to me, looking for any fossil evidence or any direct evidence that a red wolf ever existed in the State of North Carolina.

I have been somewhat perplexed as to how to prove a negative.

I can unequivocally state that there was not one shred of direct, indirect, specific or any physical evidence that a red wolf of any type ever existed in the State of North Carolina, much less the “red wolf” that USFWS invented. If you don’t believe me, read it all yourself. Have your attorneys read it. USFWS could not provide to me any evidence that a red wolf ever existed in the State of North Carolina.

Suffice it to say, your biologists just repeatedly made false statements and manipulated maps and words enough that a trusting general public believed them. The situation reminds a lot me of how your recovery program, to be managed on 250,000 acres of federal refuge land, quickly morphed into a 1.7 million acre government land grab for your invented wolf simply because your biologists needed the land.

It appears to me that USFWS dumped their own commissioned red wolf range map in favor of a Ron Nowak invented map, which shows fossil evidence that matches exactly the 1972 USFWS commissioned home range map with one major exception. With the stroke of a pen, Nowak conveniently drew a fictitious line on the map to include the State of North Carolina. This certainly suited the needs of USFWS just fine.

I believe I have read every wolf “novel” USFWS Ron Nowak ever wrote. Some of the few times North Carolina was specifically mentioned by Nowak was in his article The Mysterious Wolf of the South:

CivilWarWolves

And again here in his article The Validity of the Red Wolf, where he confirms the construction of his invented wolf with his now invented range map:

Breeding

Let’s now look at Nowak’s map and the manipulation of the drawing in spite of no evidence in NC, which certainly fit the needs of USFWS:
NewDistributionMap

Validity of the Red Wolf: Response to Roy et al.
R. M. Nowak; N. E. Federoff
Conservation Biology, Vol. 12, No. 3. (Jun., 1998), pp. 722-725.

Now, take the time to compare the above Nowak map to the USFWS commissioned red wolf historic range map:

Pretty remarkable isn’t it? USFWS is certainly not one to let the truth and facts stand in their way. The manipulation of data happened and the truth was ignored.

Let’s now fast forward to 1998.

NowakMap

Even in 1998, Nowak is still at a loss for any evidence of a red wolf in the State of North Carolina, yet USFWS has so much money tied up in this farce now that they proceed on in spite of the facts. Just as they continue to do today.

This should not surprise you as USFWS at this time was also ignoring the then available DNA evidence which proved this wolf was not even a unique species. Furthermore by 2011, Dr. Roland Kays in the “most detailed genomic study of any wild vertebrate species” declared the transplanted “red wolf in North Carolina was only 24% wolf and 76% coyote”. USFWS chose to ignore this fact also.

This concludes how the range map was invented.

I know this is getting long but bear with me, the story only gets better.

Why the invented/constructed wolf needed an invented/constructed range map:

Now why did USFWS dump their very own commissioned map by their very own red wolf recovery team and adopt a map based on theories presented by Ron Nowak in his PHD dissertation for the University of Kansas?

In the mid to late 1970’s, with the Point Defiance Zoo in Tacoma, Washington full of newly constructed wolves, USFWS was scrambling hard to find a suitable place to turn their new toys loose.

The Land Between the Lakes in Kentucky and Tennessee was selected and targeted for a release site, as this fit the critical historic range requirement for a 10 (j) nonessential experimental species. However in 1984 this project was abandoned due to lack of public and state support. Read between the lines here, these guys were not duped by false USFWS claims about this so called wolf and what it would mean to their State.

This was no problem for an agency full of over zealous biologists. It was at this time that USFWS acquired the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in eastern North Carolina.

On the surface things looked good for the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge location, but there was one major problem. The Endangered Species Act 10(J) rule specifically states that a nonessential experimental population of wolves may only be released within their historical range.

This was certainly not an obstacle for such a creative group of USFWS biologists who had invented a new species. They would just deliberately scuttle and hide from the world their own USFWS funded and commissioned range map based on fossil evidence.

USFWS only needed to invent a new map that would fit their needs. USFWS then conveniently changed their very own range map based upon fossil remains in favor of convoluted statements, hypotheses and surmises from a dissertation done by a student from the University of Kansas in order to make the newly acquired Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge fit their legal requirements of the 10(j) rule under the ESA.

And who was the student whose dissertation was used in lieu of a USFWS commissioned study and map? You guessed it, Ron Nowak of “if the red wolf did not exist we would need to invent it”. Pretty fitting isn’t it?

Mr. Nowak later resigned from USFWS in 1997 saying:

“My primary reason for seeking this opportunity to retire is that this agency is no longer adequately supporting the function for which I was hired, the classification and protection of wildlife pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and indeed, often is working against this function”

So let’s be clear about things at this point.

USFWS constructs a so called red wolf in a Zoo in Washington State by breeding hybrid coywolfs from Texas.

Since the animal never existed, USFWS had to invent the species by ignoring modern DNA analysis funded by USFWS.

When Kentucky and Tennessee said absolutely “NO” to the idea of releasing this new “wolf” in their Land between the Lakes refuge, USFWS conveniently changed their very own commissioned range map based upon fossil remains in order to meet the ESA 10(j) rules.

USFWS then proceeded to release over 100 of the invented red wolves with no ESA Section 7 authorization of which 64 were illegally released on private land.

USFWS has thus far made no attempt to remove these illegally released wolves as requested by the NCWRC in the same manner as they have ignored the private landowner’s removal requests for almost 30 years.

And now Part 7 of this series, confirms USFWS has willfully and intentionally released 132 non-native invasive canines in the State of North Carolina in direct violation of The Endangered Species Act 10(J) rule, which specifically states that a nonessential experimental population of wolves may only be released within their historical range.

Note that these wolves bred from hybrid coywolves trapped over 1,400 miles away in the State of Texas and were manufactured in the State of Washington, over 3,000 miles away from North Carolina.

There is a very good reason for this critical historic range provision in the ESA. 30 years and over $30,000,000 later a defunct program with only 3 more breeding pairs of wolves than the project started with but with countless hybrids produced, is all the proof that anyone needs that it simply does not pay to break the rules and ignore the facts.

This remains true even today with a looming decision regarding the fate of this USFWS program built upon lies, deceit, arrogance, manipulation of data and unlawful activities.

As Director of USFWS,

– after you comply with, our NCWRC request for removal of the 64 wolves and their offspring that were illegally released on private land,

– and then you retrieve the 100 or so wolves and their offspring that USFWS released with no Section 7 authority,

– and then comply with the recent request for removal of wolves from over 514 landowners,

will you then please pick up any remaining wolves in our State and their resulting offspring, as they are a non-native invasive species to our State and were illegally released in violation of the ESA historic range provision by your biologists.

I hope you have a great day.

Sincerely,

Jett Ferebee

PS. I almost forgot. Are you still unable to identify the canine species pictured below?

Mongrel

Share

The Invention of “Frankenwolf” in North Carolina

*Editor’s Note* – While readers await Part VII, of the 7-part email series about the corruption and incompetence of introducing so-called red wolves into North Carolina, consider the evidence presented as to how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service invented a wild dog species to protect under the Endangered Species Act at an overwhelming cost to the American Public. Job security I would guess. After all, isn’t this simply a reflection of all things GOVERNMENT?

Director Ashe,

I know these comments from a rather heated meeting of USFWS biologists in1989 are rather technical, so I have put in bold letters the key and shocking revelations regarding the cover up of the red wolf invention. Keep this quote from USFWS Zoologist/Biologist Ron Nowak in mind as you read.

InventingRedWolf

?
The USFWS’s $30,000,000.00 “Invention”

“In 1979, US Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Ronald Nowak carefully compared the skulls of grey wolves, and coyotes and noticed that the size and shape of the red wolf skull fell midway between that of the coyote and the grey wolf. Nowak’s interpretation of the fossil record further suggested to him that intermediate skulls like that of the red wolf skull first appeared in North America more than a million years ago, well before the first wolves or coyotes.” “Nowak concluded that the red wolf was not only a unique species but also the ancient ancestor of both the grey wolf and the coyote.”

“Nowak’s compelling idea one that persisted almost unchallenged for 10 years, throughout the early years of the Red Wolf Recovery Program.”

“But David Mech had a different theory about red wolves.” “In a 1970 book , Mech had proposed that the red wolf was neither species nor subspecies but a hybrid produced by interbreeding between the grey wolf and the coyote.”

“Into this heated conflict stepped David Mech, one of the world leading wolf experts. In 1989, at an Atlanta meeting of experts on wolf biology, Mech challenged his fellow researches to tell him how they could justify spending so much money rescuing the red wolf when it might not even be a species.”

“In 1989, two University of California biologist, Robert Wayne (of UCLA) and Susan Jenks (of UC Berkley), approached the US Fish and Wildlife Service and offered to settle the matter once and for all.” “Like Nowak, Wayne was an expert on the morphology and taxonomy of wolves and other canids.”

“The government agreed to fund the study, and the two biologist began examining DNA from red wolves, grey wolves and coyotes.”

“The two biologist tentatively and somewhat reluctantly concluded that the red wolf was most likely a hybrid of the grey wolf and the coyote.”

“Nowak and the other biologist at the US Fish and Wildlife Service could not believe what they were being told.” “Maybe, argued the government biologist, Wayne and Jenks had simply missed the DNA sequences that distinguished the red wolf.” Maybe they had not looked at enough DNA.”

“To put to rest any linger doubts, Wayne and other colleagues turned to special receptive regions of the DNA in the nucleus, called micro satellites.” “The results were the same, neither the samples of blood from living red wolves nor the samples from the skins of pre-1930s red wolves showed any unique sequences.” “By 1994, Wayne had found no evidence that the red wolf had ever been reproductively isolated from either grey wolves or coyotes.”

“The red wolf had to be a hybrid of the grey wolf and the coyote.”

“Wayne’s genetic data proved to be an embarrassment to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which had poured millions of dollars into the reintroduction program in the belief that the red wolf was a unique and endangered species.” “Yet the agency had acted in good faith.” “Until Wayne and his colleagues finished their research, the US Fish and Wildlife Service had no way of knowing that the red wolf was not a species.”

“Now the government agency was faced with a terrible dilemma.” “Wayne’s resulting threaten to discredit the wolf recovery program, strip the red wolf of its endangered status, and further undermine the increasingly battered public image of the federal Endangered Species Act.”

*** “To protect the red wolf, the US Fish and Wildlife Service began pressuring Wayne to avoid the word “Hybrid” in his research papers and to substitute the term “intergrade species” and other similar phrases.”

“In 1995, the US Department of the Interior issued a legal opinion that said that hybrids would be protected under the Endangered Species Act if Morphological evidence showed that the hybrids ere similar to the endangered “Pure” form.”

“In essence, if they looked like red wolves, they would be protected.”

“But the genetic data did not support that idea that a “Pure” form of the red wolf had ever existed, certainly not in the last 100 years.”

“In issuing this opinion, the agency excluded all the genetic evidence regarding the red wolf’s species status.” The only question was whether the red wolf looked different from the coyote and the grey wolf.”

“It did, and, therefore, until such time as the government acknowledges the genetic data, the red wolf will be considered a species.”

https://books.google.com/books?id=cjgdW4SjoJcC&pg=PA397&lpg=PA397&dq=ronald+nowak+red+wolf+map&source=bl&ots=rxq05Z

Director Ashe, the red wolf did not exist so it was “invented” by USFWS through omission of your own Government funded current science.

Ponder this over the weekend, as it is heavily tied into Part 7 due out on Monday.

Sincerely,

Jett Ferebee

Share

Cowboy Bitten by Coyote/Wolf, Saves Dogs With Rock

Press Release from Wolf Crossing dot Org:

While packing salt to a herd of cattle on Wednesday, a ranch manager in eastern Catron County heard a distressed cow bawling and upon investigation the man and his cow dogs were attacked by what he described as a pack of coy/wolves or coyote hybrids.

“I tied my mules up and went to the fight, my dogs were with me. There were 7-8 animals not including my cow dogs and the cow was still trying to protect that baby calf.” Says the cowboy who didn’t wish to be identified due to past harassment by extremists.

“Two of those animals had my hound dog down and were going to kill him. I didn’t bring my pistol, so I hit one with a rock; the other one bit me on the arm and I think I stuck it with my pocket knife and it let go. I finally got my dogs called back enough to get some control of the situation but those animals weren’t leaving and I was afoot without a weapon.”

The cowboy was able to back out of the scene with his dogs and find his pack mule, but his riding mule had taken off for home in the heat of the moment.

USDA Wildlife services and the Catron county law enforcement were notified of the event and an investigation was launched the next day. Clearly the incident was abnormal for what is described as Mexican wolf behavior. Wildlife Service found bite marks on the dead baby calf measuring 39-40 mm; about average size for Mexican wolves but too big to be coyote size which ranges 27-33 mm.

“There was all sizes of the things, small ones, and a couple big ones too. I thought they were coyotes but close up I didn’t have time to examine them really well, especially with the mess we were in.” Upon his return home the ranch hand found his arm was bruised but his heavy cotton duct, coat stopped any puncture wounds and his injuries were not serious.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife service is in the middle of the annual year end count of Mexican wolves but were not able to identify a pack in the area at the time of the attack, although there are documented collared wolf packs that use the area as territory. The cowboy said none had collars at the time of the incident and no radio collar signal was found in the area the day of the investigation.

Ranchers in the area have been pleading with FWS to begin analysis of the wolf packs on the ranches in the area due to an increased belief that they are interbreeding with coyotes resulting in bigger packs of coyote like animals.

Jess Carey, Catron county wolf interaction investigator, wants the animals involved removed and analyzed due to the aggressiveness and defense behavior of the pack.

“I am not sure what I am supposed to do out here, I can’t take care of these cattle like this with these animals running around attacking the cattle, attacking my dogs, and attacking me. This isn’t what they are supposed to be doing with this program.” Said the cowboy involved in the incident which is still under investigation.

Breeding season for both wolves and coyotes is in full swing and single wolves are making wide circles, actively searching for mates in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery area. Physically it isn’t impossible for Mexican wolves to interbreed with coyotes and in this program, wolves have been documented breeding with domestic dogs at least three separate times.

Caren Cowan of New Mexico Cattle Growers association says, “DNA analysis of the pack responsible for this attack is essential if the Mexican wolf program is to be pursued with any scientific credibility.”

Calf1

Calf2

Calf3

Share

Welfare Woman Eaten by Some of Her 50-Plus Wolf Hybrids

The skull, jawbone and thigh bone of a missing Kentucky woman were all that remained after she was most likely devoured by dozens of her pet wolf-dogs, authorities suspect.

Authorities found more than 50 of the canine hybrids roaming around Patricia Ritz’s Fordsville property when they showed up for a welfare check, police said.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Wolf Wisdom from a Wolf Authority

Dr. Val Geist is a retired Canadian University Professor now living in British Columbia. While his title is “Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science” his field of expertise for which he is internationally recognized is the biology of wildlife and the societal implications of wildlife policy options. I have no greater respect for any academic in the field of predators and predation; two topics of great moment as you read this in North America and Europe.

Below are some very succinct and candid comments by Dr. Geist regarding the controversies and complications swirling around European wolves, their effects of rural Europeans, and the question of what is a wolf. This last question involves the genetic definition of a dog v the genetic definition of a wolf and when is a hybrid one or the other. As I have written many times over the years; I believe a wolf is a dog is a coyote (truly one species using the classical definition of a species) since all three interbreed freely and always produce viable (reproductively capable) offspring. The emerging question of what genetically is a dog or a wolf (or a coyote in North America) is both an academic (i.e. pedantic) determination as well as a value decision by government. The real, everyday aspect of this question is the many current and growing numbers of hybrids that can easily look like one another while carrying vastly different genetic make-ups.

This question of hybrids; which is what, what is protected and what is the government purpose overall is another one of the interminable sidebars that confuse the public and make informed decision-making by the public and government merely a matter of bureaucratic interests, emotions and propaganda fantasies. I would refer you to wolf effects on big game herds like elk and moose; wolves as disease and infection vectors endangering humans, domestic animals and other wildlife; wolf effects on domestic dogs; Red v Gray v Mexican v Timber, etc. wolves; and wolf effects on rural economies and the general welfare of rural residents as all similarly ignored and undefined ramifications of wolves kept totally beyond the control of those forced to live with them by powerful, remote governments.

Dr Geist’s comments are in response to a European proposal – after just sentencing some Finnish hunters to jail for killing some wolves/dogs/hybrids (?) – to legally define just what is a wolf and what is a dog. These comments should be read by everyone involved with or soon to be involved with GI (Government Issued) wolves, dogs, hybrids or “whatevers”. If you agree, PLEASE SHARE THEM FAR AND WIDE. Thanks.

Jim Beers
19 January 2015

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

————————-

Wolves cannot be kept in settled landscapes, because of the impossibility of keeping wolves and dogs apart, and the destruction of the wolf genome by creeping hybridization. While I whole-heatedly agree that there should be no keeping of wolves and wolf hybrids as pets, the sheer size of the “wolf-dog” industry as well as past releases of wolf hybrids will insure further erosion of the genome of free-ranging wolves. Secondly, how is officialdom to know of wolf hybrids unless wolf numbers are strictly and closely regulated so that plenty of specimens are available for testing. Thirdly, from my experience identifying wolves or dogs from photos sent my way I have serious doubts that European wolf specialists can currently distinguish wolf from dog. Unless limits are set early to wolf numbers – and I see no hint of that – wolf populations will expand to destroy the populations of deer and turn to livestock and humans.

Do the authors of this manifesto really think that they can significantly keep wolves and dogs apart by minimizing the number of free-ranging dogs? Even if they have some success in doing so, are they not aware that lone wolves themselves seek out dogs? Do they really think that lone wolf females in heat will desist from visiting suburbs and farms looking for a mate? Do they think that chained farm dogs will not copulate with a female wolf in heat at night? Has nobody had the experience of holding a young very large male dog in training while they come in contact with am estrus female canid? I had a Bouvier de Flandre on the leash while we came across a small wolf track in the snow – and the Bouvier went wild! He then weighed only about a hundred pounds. I had my hands full! An amorous male wolf threatened my wife when he approached an estrus hunting dog in an enclosure. No neighborhood male dog had been that bold! In short, given wolves with a desire to mate and they will intrude deep into human habitation. There is no way to effectively segregate wolves from dogs in settled landscapes. Moreover, as this is written, there is now way to protect wildlife from marauding packs of dogs either.

As I have said before, all efforts to make wolves compatible with settle landscapes are a waste of time and energy. All marauding canids in settle landscape need to be removed. This raises the question of how to conserve wolves as a species. What we know for certain is that they need to be kept away from people and dogs. In the first instance that means that wolves and other large predators need to be kept where the public has no entry. And such areas need to be large. The very first step is to negotiate internationally for keeping large predators on military and atomic reserves. I doubt that national parks are suitable because the tourist lobby will balk. Secondly, means and ways need to be found to control closely wolf populations in such reserves to insure that the predators do not run out of prey, and leave the reserves for settled landscapes. Well-fed wolves will cause the least problems. Severe trapping and predator control in 20th century North America kept wolves out of settled landscapes, eliminated agricultural losses and disease transmission, retained their genetic integrity, while attacks on humans were unheard of.

Wolf conservation as proposed here (i.e. Europe) is not serious.

Sincerely, Val Geist
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science

Share