March 18, 2019

Boy 10 Killed By Pack of Wolves in Siberia

From the report of Pravda:

On February 28, 2013, law enforcement agencies received information saying that the body of a 10-year-old boy with signs of violent death had been found on the isthmus of Essey Lake, located in the village of the same name. There were multiple lacerated wounds on the child’s body, similar to animal bites.<<<Read More from Pravda>>>

After this story, maybe it’s time to play a little Wolf/Coyote Bingo. Below is a sample bingo card made for Maine Coyote Bingo. Simply ignore the “Maine” and substitute wolf for “Coyote”. Then see how many boxes, containing excuses for animals, you would like to have fit this story. Good luck! And please don’t share your results with the rest of us. We know about your illness.

coyotebingo

Share

Is Claim Obama Wants Only Generals Who Will Kill Americans Real?

Unless you’re living in isolation, you should know by now that there are claims that President Obama is administering a new litmus test to his leading military personnel to determine, if asked to, would they follow orders from their superiors and kill American citizens. The claim seems to have originated in an interview with Dr. James Garrow, touted as being a one-time Nobel Peace nominee, I believe now living in Toronto, Canada. Garrow claims, in the 21-minute video below, that his source, described as being a legend among Americans, wishes to remain anonymous but at the same time requested Garrow to go public with his information.

Continuing with my own belief that the ultimate goal of Obama and the global ruling class is to create enough distrust and anger among and between the American citizens to drive them into the streets in violent protest in order that the president can declare a “national emergency”, I have valid reasons to be suspicious and skeptical of what Dr. Garrow is saying.

If I am wrong, rightfully, Americans should be shocked and outraged that any commander in chief would seek such a litmus test to determine the leadership capabilities of his generals.

Consider my concerns:

1. Obama seeks to become a dictator in order to force his ideology onto Americans to prepare for a one world government in which the United States becomes an also ran. In combination of historic bills passed in Congress, dating back many years and the number of power grabbing bills and executive orders signed into law during Obama’s first four years, the stage is properly set that once a “national emergency” is declared, the sitting president becomes a dictator. Is this reason enough to find ways of angering the masses and driving them into the streets?

2. In the video, Dr. Garrow states that he has “worked with the Catholic Church”. In that role he was on the board of Crisis Magazine, a Catholic publication whose function was the “standing by Catholic tradition and letting it animate ideas and action in the temporal order.” Pay attention in the video to the list of names in which Dr. Garrow says his work on Crisis Magazine allowed him to “meet”; Zbigniew Brzezinski is on that list. The Catholic Church wants the U.S. disarmed as well. Oddly enough, there is not a lot on the Internet about Dr. Garrow and his past.

Also note that at the end of this video, Garrow evokes the name of god. Those of knowledge understand that the use of such tactics can be meant to deceive. Garrow was the founder of the Bethune Institute, an establishment created to honor Dr. Norman Bethune, who after traveling to Russia to study their system of health care, became a committed communist, eventually carrying out his communist work in China. Dr. Garrow is actively working in China through a program called Pink Pagoda, so save girls doomed for infanticide. Garrow points out that China wishes very strongly that the American citizenry is stripped of their weapons for much the same reasons as the emperor of Japan was at the onset of their attack on Pearl Harbor.

3. Garrow specifically declares that he thinks the intentions of the Obama Administration, supported by his conversation with his source, is to kickoff a civil war. He says that if Americans really knew what was going on they would be preparing for a civil war and that Obama has been really surprised at the amount of resistance there has been to his gun grab proposals. He states that America is now better prepared to rise up against Obama. Is he inciting this action or warning us it is the plan?

4. Many of the keywords and phrases used in this video are used to incite emotions in people. Every possible anti Obama talking point is brought up in this interview; never any agreement and always polarity.

5. If this “legend of the American people” is such a legend and has so much concern for the American people against a despotic ruler, then why the need to hide behind an anonymous identity? And Garrow states that he doesn’t believe his source will come forward. Consider for a moment. Someone, claimed in this video, achieved the highest rank in the U.S. military, believes that Obama plans to kill Americans in order to fulfill his dreams of progressive socialism, and he chooses to remain anonymous. This is so outrageous. If this is true, then impeachment proceedings on Obama should begin immediately and stop hiding behind some imaginary wall of safety while Americans may be at risk for their lives. If this is true, then a “legend among Americans” would certainly give the claim credibility or at least give people a chance to scrutinize the source. Makes no sense.

6. Pay attention in the video because it is brought out that this information that Obama has a new litmus test doesn’t come from Garrow’s anonymous “hero” source, but a third party. Red flag?

7. Garrow says the message that needs to go out to military personnel is they don’t need to resign commissions but to stand firm and wait and see what happens. Really?

I may be wrong. I am still sticking with my contention that all this rancorous debate of guns and executive orders is intended to anger the American people. Don’t get me wrong. I believe Obama and his totalitarian buddies want to disarm the American people but I also think he knows he’s not going to get it done with gun control laws and executive orders. Through a national emergency, resulting in his dictatorial rule, he believes he then will TAKE arms away from the public and thus the need to find out if his generals will do that. Or, he may not need his own generals at all. There’s always NATO and the UN.

What you may be seeing in this video is, in fact, the future plan that you and I are going to be subjected to and the purpose of this video, complete with the story of an “anonymous” source, a “legend among Americans”, is nothing more than a tool to be used to lead us like cattle down that path. Think before you get the cattle prod.

You watch the video, do some serious research and decide for yourself.

Share

Wolves: An Emergency Situation

By Will Graves, author of Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages and a soon to be new release about wolves in the United States.

sakha republic

Early this January an emergency situation has been declared in the republic by the Sakha leader Yegor Borisov due to an overpopulation of wolves. He has had his fill of wolves. The wolves are prowling at the edge of villages frightening the people. There are an estimated 3,500 wolves in the republic, and Mr. Borisov said the ideal number of wolves should be 500. In 2012 the wolves killed 16,111 reindeer and 313 horses. The estimated value of one reindeer is about $328.00, which adds up to an approximate loss of $5,000,000 dollars to reindeer herders. Although 750 wolves had been recently culled, the damage done in 2012 compared to damage in 2011 went up by a 4.3 %. To reduce the predation by wolves in any given area, it usually takes a culling of from 80 to 90% of the wolves for about 8 to 10 years. Reducing the population by 10 to 50% one year will have negligible effect. (Observations by Will Graves, author of “Wolves in Russia.”)

Mr. Borisov will initiate a culling program on the 15th of January 2013, the goal of which is to reduce the wolf population from 3,500 to 500. As an incentive for hunters and herders to cull wolves, he has placed a bounty of $629 or $680 per each wolf pelt. The difference in the amount of the bounty is because of fluctuations in the currency exchange rates. Additionally, the first three hunters who cull the most wolves will receive awards mounting to more than $3000 each. (Source. “Russian Region Declares State of Emergency Due to Wolf Attacks,” Internet Radio Free Europe, January 11, 2013.

“Wolves at the Door in Siberia,”, Internet article by Andrew Kramer, January 10, 2013.)

Vladimir Krever, the Russian World Wildlife Federation’s Head of the State Committee Biodiversity Program, said, “When wolves start attacking deer and livestock they have to be killed and the population controlled. This is the right policy.” He made this statement when talking about Khakassia, a republic located about 1,000 miles southwest of Sakha (Yakutiya). He added, “Even if they were able to kill 3,000 wolves the population would recover quickly…”
(Source. “Second Russian Republic Declares Open Season on Wolves,” Internet Outdoor Hub Reporters, January 11, 2013.)

In addition to heavy predation on reindeer, the wolves carry and spread around parasites and diseases. The parasite Echinococcus granulosus is particularly damaging and threatening, including being a threat to humans. A resident of the city of Yakutsk send me a notice that the Yakutian (Sakha) Scientific Research Institute of Agricultural Science sent out to residents of Yakutiya in 2010. The notice warned people about the threat of Echinococcus granulosus and Echinococcus multilocularis. On 3 March 2010 I sent a cover letter and a translation of that report to the Montana Environmental Quality Control Committee.

In 1962 it was reported that E. g. occurred widely in wolves in the Soviet Union. (Source.“Cystic Echinococcosis in the Arctic and Sub-Arctic, Robert L. Rausch, 2003, page 877, by Petrov and Delianova 1962.)
Three of four wolves examined in the Novosibusk Oblast were found by Lukashenko in 1975 to be infected with E. multilocularis, and the fourth with E. g. (Ibed, page 876.).

In my opinion, the bottom line is that wolf numbers need to be controlled.

Share

Stupid News Headline Makes Me Laugh

Every so often, we run into funny news headlines simply because of the way they are worded. For example, I found this in the Critter News this morning. A Russian woman, who had, it seems, been drinking (too much) decided to go feed a polar bear some chicken legs she had left over and got attacked by the bear instead.

However, the headline read: “Polar bear attacks drunken lady with chicken legs in Russia“. I think it bad enough the woman made a very stupid and alcohol influenced decision to go feed a polar bear but to add insult to injury saying the woman had “chicken legs” isn’t fair…..or very professional.

Share

To Catch A Wolf – Part II

If you missed part one of “To Catch a Wolf” you can find that at this link. This link for Part III and Part IV and Part V.

As I mentioned in Part I of “To Catch a Wolf”, wolves are not easy game to hunt. As I surmised also, had Russia been interested enough or financially capable to employ a steady dose of decent wolf management, perhaps some of the tactics used by wolf hunters wouldn’t have become necessary. I’m referring to tactics that resulted in mass killings of wolves.

Needless to say, some day into the future, I’m sure that one way or another, the United States is going to be faced with a dilemma on what to do about too many wolves. Initial plans are being made in some states (I mentioned Idaho in Part I) as to what rules will govern the wolf hunts if they are ever removed from protection. As in Idaho’s case, the rules essentially ban every means of hunting except for a man and his rifle. Historic documents tell us that this will not work. Initial wolf hunts may see some results but once the crafty canine discovers he is being hunted, one man and one rifle will not be any challenge to the wolf.

Previously, we discovered that in Russia, the wealthy (barons) people undertook wolf hunts utilizing pigs in canvas bags as decoys. We also read in great detail how the barons teamed up with the peasants, who had crafted a great palisade (elaborate trap) in order to kill several wolves at one time.

Let’s move our journey westward into France. In 1814 the state granted the Louvetiers permission to hunt wolves. Louvetiers were public officers appointed as superintendents in the “wolf districts”. Their job was to “encourage” the destruction of the wolf.

Roderic O’Connor writes in “An Introduction to the Field Sports of France” that the most difficulty realized by wolf hunters was finding a way to get them out in the open so they could be killed.

I should remind readers that in writings about wolves and wolf dogs of Teddy Roosevelt’s he says the only way to hunt wolves is with the use of hunting dogs.

The wolf is one of the animals which can only be hunted successfully with dogs. Most dogs however do not take at all kindly to the pursuit. A wolf is a terrible fighter. He will decimate a pack of hounds by rabid snaps with his giant jaws while suffering little damage himself; nor are the ordinary big dogs, supposed to be fighting dogs, able to tackle him without special training.

O’Connor says that the only way to get wolves out of the thickets is with a “powerful and well-appointed pack of hounds”. As a matter of fact, it is suggested that no fewer than 100 – 120 hunting hounds are necessary. Still the challenge is daunting.

In wolf hunting, they enter the forest as quietly as possible, and thus endeavour to get near the wolf before he starts, which is a matter of considerable difficulty , as he is always on the alert, and has so quick a perception of their approach that he generally steals off before they come up with him. If the forest is large and sufficiently dense to afford him protection, he can seldom be forced to quit it: he then twists and doubles through all its intricacies with which he is thoroughly acquainted, and exerts all his subtlety to baffle his enemies. The hunters have no remedy but to press on the hounds, and thus endeavour to overpower him and compel him to bolt, or to hunt him down in the forest: but if he is found in a less extensive forest, or one which does not afford him sufficient scope to play off his cunning dodges, he saves them all trouble on that score, at once decides on starting for some distant forest, perhaps some 15 or 20 miles off, where he knows he will find ample protection, and dashes away like lightning ; they then come in for a splendid run,

We learn that having 100-120 “powerful and well-appointed” hounds is rare and so other methods are employed. For instance, the hunters may gather as many hounds as they can get and head into the forest to find the wolves much in the same manner as is described above. The hunters set themselves up in ambush.

They are obliged to observe the strictest silence, and to conceal themselves with the utmost caution, for the wolf, who is peculiarly quick sighted, proceeds with great circumspection, and carefully examines every object before him.

If hunting dogs are not available and the louvetiers need to rid the community of the wolves, they commandeers as many “chasseurs” (chasers) as possible and head for the woods.

When it is ascertained that a wolf is lurking in a particular locality, the louvetier of the district assembles as many chasseurs as possible, and, assuming the command of the party , proceeds to the cover, stations his chasseurs in the best positions he can select, and then enters the wood with a few beaters.

As soon as the wolf perceives them advancing, he endeavours to steal off unobserved , finds all the passes guarded, and meets with a warm reception from his concealed enemies. They generally aim at his shoulder, but if there is any bungling, and he returns into the wood, it is quite hopeless to think of forcing him out a second time. It would be easier to hunt a rabbit out of an acre of furze, (which is no easy matter, I can assure you), than to compel him to break cover again : he must then be dealt with in some other manner , and the difficulty of getting at him, is considerably increased.

As you can now well see, when wolves became a problem in certain communities, depending upon the urgency of the situation, depended somewhat on what methods were used to kill the wolf or wolves. When too many wolves became a real problem, serious tactics where used. This one is called the wolf battue.

The most effectual method of destroying these detestable animals, when a neighbourhood is infested with them, is the general wolf battue: it is called traque in many parts of the country, from the word traqueur; the synonyme-of our word beater. This wolf battue- is conducted by the louvetier of the district, and is a very formidable and curious proceeding. He assembles several hundred persons armed with guns , staves , pitchforks, swords and all manner of destructive weapons; and, after disposing a long train of shooters and placing them so that nothing can escape without coming under their fire; he then forms his traqueurs into lines, placing them sufficiently near to each other to preclude the possibility of any wolves passing between them. When they are thus arranged, he gives the signal, and they immediately commence striking the trees and bushes with their sticks and pitchforks, firing oil guns and pistols, blowing horns , beating drums, and making all manner of hideous noises, advancing at the same time in a slow and regular manner, so that nothing can get through their line, and thus driving all before them. The wolves thus frightened by the din of war, lay aside their repugnance to the open country, and break cover in all directions. The slaughter then commences, and they are shot while endeavouring to make their escape.

Not always are communities so overrun with wolves but make no mistake about it, wolves are always present and looking for a quick and easy meal – goat or sheep, poultry, pet or most anything that will stave of hunger.

It was often left up to the individual farmer to devise ways to capture and/or kill problem wolves on his own. To watch a flock of sheep or protect the barn all night required a lot of man power and time, seriously putting a cramp on anyone’s lifestyle.

The following ingenious description of an unattended live trap, I found quite fascinating.

When wolves are not sufficiently numerous to demand such tumultuous proceedings; or when the forests are too extensive for the adoption of the battue system , various contrivances are set on foot to entrap them. Of these, the tour a loup which is considered very destructive, is worthy of notice: it is constructed as follows: some convenient spot is selected in the vicinity of a farm house, or in some locality where they are in the habit of committing nocturnal depredations: a circle is described, of from 8 to 10 feet in diameter; good strong stakes of, at least, 10 feet in length, are then procured; they are pointed at one end and driven firmly into the ground in the circumference of the circle, at a distance of 5 inches apart from each other, leaving one open space of 18 inches only for an entrance.

A second circle is then described with the same centre, so that its circumference may lie within 16 inches of the outer circle. Similar stakes are then firmly driven down in the circumference of the inner circle, at a like distance from each other, and without leaving any aperture for an entrance: the circular path lying between the two rows of stakes is well trodden down to represent a beaten path: the door, which should be made of good strong timber, is then hung on easy iron hinges, and so contrived that when shut from the inside , it will remain fast, by means of a latch falling into its proper place. A goose, or a sheep, is then placed in the central space, from whence it cannot escape, and the door, (which opens inwards), is left open, and stops up the passage on one side.

The wolf, attracted by the animal within, approaches with his usual caution : and, at length, seeing the door open, and the beaten path before him, enters. Once in, he cannot turn in the narrow path, and goes round until he comes behind the door which he pushes on and closes upon himself.

Not only do we learn of the cleverness of the farmer or whoever it was that designed this trap, we also see things that give us hints as to the intelligence of the wolf being trapped. They had to actually make the ground between the two circles look like a well worn path otherwise the wolf might become too suspicious and not enter.

The author also offers up an interesting observation, one of which I have never heard before this reading.

When wolves once taste human flesh they become perfectly ferocious and will ever afterwards attack a man when they meet him alone. They pass by the flock and fly at the shepherd.

I have read about quite a few wolf attacks on humans in several parts of the world and this is the first reference I can recall exclaiming that wolves like the taste of human flesh.

As I pointed out at the conclusion of Part I, I am not advocating for people in America to take up their staves and pitchforks and become part of a wolf drive that will force wolves into an ambush with the intent of killing every wolf possible. The point I’m making is that it has always been a very difficult task for wolves and human to live together in peace and harmony.

Historic documents from Russia, Italy, India, France, Scandinavia, America and Canada should tell us that a steady dose of good wolf management, which includes strict controls on populations will go a long way in avoiding what people had to go through years ago in order to protect their communities and personal property.

The wolf is an intelligent and highly adaptable creature. When the time comes to hunt them, I’m afraid we will learn that setting a man with only his rifle afoot to catch a wolf will make for a tedious effort with little result.

Tom Remington

Share

To Catch A Wolf – Part I

Link to Part II
Link to Part III
Link to Part IV
Link to Part V

To be frank, there exists today very few people who have first hand knowledge on how to hunt a wolf. Wolf hunting many years ago became quite popular for a myriad of reasons, from the thrill of the adrenaline pumping danger to a matter of survival.

Today in America we talk of when the day comes, if ever, that the wolf we be taken off the list of protected species and man will once again be able to hunt this animal. We, including myself, often speak of the “Disneyesque” perception people today have of the wolf. I think the same can be said, at least to some degree, about how sportsmen are going to “hunt” the wolf when the time comes.

As a game management tool, specifically a population control measure, hunting has been a socially acceptable and scientifically viable means of accomplishing that task, however, I’m not so sure that we understand the difficulties we will be presented with in hunting this intelligent and highly adaptable beast.

I have been spending a considerable amount of time lately reading many accounts of methods used to hunt and kill wolves. Some of those I have already shared with you and other I’ve not. In a multi-part series I would like to take a little time and share with you some of the ingenious methods and sometimes comical tactics (you have to have a sense of humor) employed by hunters and trappers over the years.

In a book written by Will N. Graves, “Wolves in Russia: Anxiety Through the Ages“, the author shares with readers an entire chapter on successful and not so successful methods used in Russia for centuries to hunt and or capture wolves. In an article I wrote last month, I told of those methods and how they might compare to the rules the state of Idaho has laid out for wolf hunting as being effective.

In short, Idaho will prohibit using any method to trap a wolf. There are restrictions on weapons that will be allowed, no electronic calls, no baiting and no use of hounds. In other words, it is man against beast.

Teddy Roosevelt wrote quite extensively about his experiences with wolves in the U.S. during the late 1800s. He tells of the difficulties in being able to hunt the wolf. He also sheds light on the fact that the Indians and the old hunters bred dogs, often with wolves, in order to create a mean wolf fighting/hunting machine.

The true way to kill wolves, however, is to hunt them with greyhounds on the great plains. Nothing more exciting than this sport can possibly be imagined. It is not always necessary that the greyhounds should be of absolutely pure blood. Prize-winning dogs of high pedigree often prove useless for the purposes. If by careful choice, however, a ranchman can get together a pack composed both of the smooth-haired greyhound and the rough-haired Scotch deer-hound, he can have excellent sport. The greyhounds sometimes do best if they have a slight cross of bulldog in their veins; but this is not necessary. If once a greyhound can be fairly entered to the sport and acquires confidence, then its wonderful agility, its sinewy strength and speed, and the terrible snap with which its jaws come together, render it a most formidable assailant. Nothing can possibly exceed the gallantry with which good greyhounds, when their blood is up, fling themselves on a wolf or any other foe. There does not exist, and there never has existed on the wide earth, a more perfect type of dauntless courage than such a hound. Not Cushing when he steered his little launch through the black night against the great ram Albemarle, not Custer dashing into the valley of the Rosebud to die with all his men, not Farragut himself lashed in the rigging of the Hartford as she forged past the forts to encounter her iron-clad foe, can stand as a more perfect type of dauntless valor.

I have written more about Teddy Roosevelt’s experiences with wolves. You can follow this link to read. However, if you would like to read Roosevelt’s accounts in “Wolves and Wolf-Hounds“, this link will take you there. I will warn you though that some of his accounts of hunts with these dogs might be a bit gruesome, however factual.

In Russia, as well as many other places in Europe, I am discovering, for centuries they have had to learn to deal with wolves. The peasants, or common folk, couldn’t hunt for wolves because either guns were prohibited or they couldn’t afford a gun or the ammunition to use in it. Centuries of wolf encounters gave the Russians ample time to devise ways of controlling the animal.

I would like to point out however that even though I am going to share accounts of some of these methods, Russia for the most part did a lousy job of controlling wolves. In places there were too many causing the ungodly loss of life and property as historic documents now available from that country are more readily available, point out.

Sketches of Russian Life Before and During the Emancipation of the Serfs” By Henry Morley, gives us a couple accounts of how Russians dealt with wolves. Take note that in these writings, the “barons” end up utilizing the crafty ingenuity of the peasants in order to bag their “trophies”.

The first method utilizes a pig as a decoy. What I have discovered is that this was common across much of Europe as well, as I will relate in later articles. In this case, the hunters took a pig and transported it in a “strong canvas sack” on a horse drawn sleigh.

Upon reaching their hunting destination, the pig, kept in the canvas bag, was made to squeal hoping to attract the attention of wolves. Hunters would wait at a distance to shoot the wolves when they came out after the pig. (I assume that using the “strong canvas sack” not only prohibited the pig from running away, it also protected the pig from the hungry wolves. The wolves approached the bag with a squealing pig in it but didn’t know quite what to make of it.)

Two wolves emerged from the forest and after having both been killed by the hunters, the remainder of the entire pack – about 15 wolves – came out of the woods. Dragging the two dead wolves behind the sleigh and retrieving the pig and canvas bag, the hunters took off down the road luring the wolves behind.

Much as one might suspect how the aerial shooting of wolves today is done, the horses, driver and hunters coordinated their efforts and managed kill a few more of the pack.

As you can see in this case there were few restrictions placed on the hunters.

But the ingenuity gets quite interesting. Being the idea of the sleigh driver, it is decided to send the hunters ahead to a filthy retreat of many crusty trappers, where a palisade has been built to trap wolves. The palisade is a construction of poles, staves and whatever of quite large size. If wolves, or any other animal for that matter, can be lured or tricked into entering the palisade, it is then trapped. The method is almost laughable.

In a short time all was quiet and every necessary preparation made. Then came the howling of wolves and the screaming as of a pig (the driver of the sleigh, Mattvic, now riding the horse and being chased by wolves, is howling like a pig), the gallop of a horse over the hard crisp snow, the rush of many small feet. The outer door in the palisade was dashed open, and Mattvic, followed in half a minute by the whole pack, rushed in. The half-minute was just sufficient to enable Mattvic to vanish through the outer door into the trap. Then, as the last pressure on the door was removed, it closed with a loud sharp sound, and some five-and-twenty wolves were snared in a space not larger than twelve feet by twenty. We did not at first close the inner gateway, but, levelling our pieces at the mass of wolves now huddling themselves up in a corner, poured in two volleys in rapid succession, then closed the gate, and reloaded for another charge. The change from the air of ferocious savage daring which the wolves had displayed in pursuit of a single horseman, to abject terror when they found themselves caught in the narrow trap, was instantaneous. They were like sheep in a pen, crushing up in a corner, riding on the top of one another, lying down on their bellies, crouching and shivering with fear. It is not necessary to describe the scene of mere slaughter. Two staves were chopped out of the gateway, that -we might fire through. The drop-panels were opened, and two or three were admitted at a time to the next division; there dogs were let in on them through the adjoining trap, or they were killed by men with great hars of wood or axes; and at length, when only six or seven remained, three of the men went in amongst them, and with perfect safety despatched them. They say that a worm will turn on the heel that treads on it, but wolves caught in a trap like this, from which there is no escape, have less courage than a worm. They crouch, shiver, and die, as I saw, without one effort at self-defence or one snap of retaliation.

I am not suggesting in this article or any of the others that will follow, that I am advocating for this kind of wolf slaughter in Idaho or any other state that may in the future hunt wolves. But please don’t miss the point that I’m trying to make.

We don’t know how to hunt wolves. Even the experiences Americans have had in dealing with wolves dates back several decades now and it seems the only talk of these wolves involves only the fact that the wolf was driven to near extinction for several reasons, the biggest finger being pointed at man. We have been taught that the wolf is “misunderstood” and needs protecting.

With wolves growing at a rate of as high as 30% a year in some places and no indications that wolves will be removed from protection anytime soon, should that day come, we may need at our disposal more methods of hunting wolves other than one man and one rifle, lest we be forced into mass killings.

Using Russia as an example, there appeared to never be any consistency in wolf population control measures. Efforts would go out to reduce wolves in some areas and then left alone only to allow the regrowth of wolves to overgrown numbers again. When culling was needed, maybe that is what triggered the creation of ways to mass kill wolves. Better management might have prohibited this kind of action.

In future parts, I will examine other methods used in the U.S., France and Scandinavia.

Tom Remington

Share